Full text of "Federal Register 1963-11-01"

See other formats

^onam* C/

^ 1 I iTTPD/k \

SCRIPTA I

FEDERAL

Pages 11661-11714

VOLUME 28 1934 e^*

* ^A/JTED ^

NUMBER 214

Washington, Friday, November J, 1963

Contents

Agricultural Marketing Service

Notices:

Fresh Irish potatoes; diversion

payment program_11699

Proposed Rule Making:

Milk in certain marketing areas:

Northern Louisiana; recom¬
mended decision_11695

Rio Grande Valley; notice of

hearing_11697

Rules and Regulations :

Carrots grown in south Texas:

Amendments to safeguards_11665

Limitation of shipments_11666

Fresh Irish potatoes; livestock
feed diversion program_11663

Agriculture Department

See also Agricultural Marketing
Service; Commodity Credit Cor¬
poration.

Rules and Regulations:

Ryegrass seed; determination of
parity prices; discontinuance_11665

Atomic Energy Commission

Notices:

Pacific Gas and Electric Co.; pro-
Posed issuance of facility license

amendment_11708

c 'vil Aeronautics Board

Notices:

Hearings, etc.:

Pan American World Airways,

Inc -. et al_ 1170 9

Air way7corpIIIII 11710
west Coast Airlines, Inc_11710

Rxjle Making:

renort^ S / Stem of accoun ts and
accofmH° r c , ertified air carriers;
credit ng for inve stment tax

W - -11697

SL Se ' vi “ Com "> i “ion

'° r " hkh there is deter-
age- hstw a man Power short-

’ wng -11710

Commerce Department

See Great Lakes Pilotage Admin¬
istration.

Commodity Credit Corporation

Rules and Regulations :

Dairy products export payment-
in-kind program; terms and
conditions_11667

Comptroller of the Currency

Notices:

Calumet National Bank of Ham¬
mond and Mercantile National
Bank of Hammond; rescission of

approval to consolidate_11699

First National Bank and Largil-
liere Company Bankers; deci¬
sion granting application to
purchase assets_11699

Customs Bureau

Rules and Regulations:

Examination and measurement of
certain products; entry, sam¬
pling and determination of clean
content of imported wool or
hair-11684

Defense Department

Rules and Regulations:

Processing unit proposals of em¬
ployee organizations for exclu¬
sive recognition purposes_11688

Federal Aviation Agency

Proposed Rule Making:

Mechanical work performed on
U.S. registered aircraft outside
of United States; notice of with¬
drawal of proposed rule making- 11698

Rules and Regulations:

Standard instrument approach
procedures; miscellaneous
amendments_11672

Federal Communications
Commission

Notices:

Hearings , etc.:

Charles County Broadcasting
Co., Inc., et al_11710

Cleveland Broadcasting, Inc.,
and Community Telecasters

of Cleveland, Inc_11710

Egle, John A., and KLFT Radio,

Inc_ 11711

Hundred Lakes Broadcasting
Corp. (WSIR) and WJBS,

Inc_ 11711

Northland Radio Corp.

(KWEB)_ 11710

S & S Broadcasting Co.

(WTAQ)_ 11711

WHDH, Inc. (WHDH-TV) et

al-11711

Rules and Regulations :

Radio broadcast services; revision
of FM broadcast rules and peti¬

tion of FM Unlimited, Inc., for
changes in FM station assign¬

ment rules- 11690

Federal Maritime Commission

Proposed Rule Making:

Shippers’ requests and com¬
plaints_ 11698

Federal Power Commission

Notices:

Hearings , etc.:

Northern Natural Gas Co_11702

Pan American Petroleum Corp.

et al-11702

Southwest Natural Production

Co. et al_11703

St. Michaels Utilities Commis¬
sion et al_11703

Superior Oil Co. et al_11699

Union Texas Petroleum et al.

(2 documents)_ 11704,11706

Federal Register Administrative
Committee

CFR Checklist_11663

Foreign Assets Control

Notices:

Importation of certain merchan¬
dise directly from Taiwan (For¬
mosa) ; available certification
by the Government of the Re¬
public of China_11699

(Continued on next page)

11661

11662

CONTENTS

General Services Administration

Rules and Regulations:

Contract appeals; rules of the
General Services Administra¬
tion Board of Contract Appeals;
miscellaneous amendments-11689

Geological Survey

Proposed Rule Making:

Connally Act Regulations; pro¬
posed revocation of require¬
ment for reports of vessel ship¬
ments_ 11695

Great Lakes Pilotage
Administration

Notices:

Anderson, Sherwood G.; order
denying renewal of registration

as U.S. Registered Pilot_11708

Golden, William E.; order revok¬
ing registration as U.S. Regis¬
tered Pilot_ 11707

Interior Department

See Geological Survey.

Interstate Commerce Commission

Notices:

Fourth section applications for re¬
lief_ 11713

Labor Department

See Wage and Hour Division,

Treasury Department

See also Comptroller of the Cur¬
rency; Customs Bureau; Foreign
Assets Control.

Notices :

Olympic Insurance Co.; surety
company acceptable on Federal
bonds_11699

Veterans Administration

Rules and Regulations:

Procurement by formal advertis¬
ing and negotiation; miscel¬
laneous amendments_11690

Wage and Hour Division

Notices :

Certificates authorizing employ¬
ment of full-time students work¬
ing outside of school hours in
retail or service establishments

at special minimum wages_11713

Rules and Regulations :

Certain industries in Puerto Rico;
wage rates:

Handkerchief, scarf, and art

linen industry_11684

Women's and children’s under¬
wear and women’s blouse in¬
dustry- 11684

Exemption from maximum hours
for certain employees of motor

carriers_ 11685

Wholesale or bulk distribution of
petroleum products by certain
enterprises; employment exempt
from overtime pay require¬
ments_ 11687

Codification Guide

The following numerical guide is a list of the parts of each title of the Code of Federal Regulations affected by
documents published in today's issue. A cumulative list of parts affected, covering the current month to date,
appears at the end of each issue beginning with the second issue of the month.

Monthly, quarterly, and annual cumulative guides, published separately from the daily issues, include the
section numbers as well as the part numbers affected.

6 CFR

29 CFR

519_11663

7 CFR

5_11665

970 (2 documents)_11665,11666

1485_11667

Proposed Rules:

1096_11695

1138_11697

608_

609_

782_

794_

30 CFR

Proposed Rules :
222 _

32 CFR

14 CFR

97 [New]_

Proposed Rules :
18_

40 _

41 _

42 _

46_

241_

270

11672 41 CFR

11698

11697

5-60

8 - 2 _

8-3.

46 CFR

Proposed Rules:
527_

19 CFR 47 CFR

13_ 11684 3_

11684

11685
11687

11695

11688

11689

11690
11690

11698

11690

Latest Revision

GUIDE TO
RECORD RETENTION
REQUIREMENTS

(Updated to January 1, 1963J

Lists (1) published requirements (in laws
and regulations) on the keeping of non*
Federal records, (2) what records must
kept and who must keep them, and
retention periods.

Price: 15 cents

Compiled by Office of the Federal Register,
National Archives and Records Service,
General Services Administration
Order from Superintendent of Documents,
Government Printing Office, Washing o
D.C., 20402

Telephone

FEDERALWREGISTER

days following official Federal J^sert-

Published daily, except Sundays, Mondays, and nays louuwmg --•- f al L-

by the Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Service, ue' Ac t,

ices Administration, pursuant to the authority contained in the Federal Jlguiatio 0 ®
r o*iTto^ WOr,h approved July 26, 1935 (49 Stat. 500, as amended; 44 U.S.C., ch. 8B), und < eT * by t&e

prescribed by the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register, approved by the President. Distribution is ma e
Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 20402. r pay&^ e

The Federal Register will be furnished by mail to subscribers, free of postage, for $1.50 per month or $15.00 per y^ or zaonfl
advance. The charge for individual copies (minimum 15 cents) varies in proportion to the size of the issue. Remi
order, made payable to the Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 20402. titles, P 01 '

The regulatory material appearing herein is keyed to the Code op Federal Regulations, which is published, un< * er the super 10 '
suant to section 11 of the Federal Register Act, as amended August 5, 1953. The Code of Federal Regulations is so ^

tendent of Documents. Prices of books and pocket supplements vary

There are no restrictions on the republication of material appearing in the Federal Register, or the Code of

Federal Regulat * 0

Rules and Regulations

Title 1—GENERAL PROVISIONS

Chapter I—Administrative Committee
of the Federal Register

CFR CHECKLIST

This checklist, arranged in order of
titles, shows the issuance date and price
of current volumes and pocket supple¬
ments of the Code of Federal Regula¬
tions. (The rate for subscription serv¬
ice to all revised volumes and pocket
supplements to be issued as of January
1, 1963, is $100 domestic, $30 additional
for foreign mailing.) Order from Su¬
perintendent of Documents, Government
Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 20402.

CFR Unit

1-4 (Revised Jan. 1, 1961)_

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_

3 1938-1943 Cum. Supp_

1943-1948 (Compilation)_

1949-1953 (Compilation)_

1954-1958 (Compilation)_

1959 (Supp.)_

1960 (Supp.)__

1961 (Supp.)_

1962 (Supp.)_

5 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1961)_

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_

6 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1963)_

7 Parts:

1-50 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1959)_

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_

51-52 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1959)_

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_

53-209 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1959)_

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_

210-399 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1960)—

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_

400-899 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1963)_

900-944 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1963)

945-980 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1963)_

981-999 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1963)

1000-1029 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1963).

1030-1059 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1963) _

1060-1089 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1963)_

1090-1119 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1963).

1120-end (Rev. Jan. 1, 1963) _.

8 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1958)_

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_

9 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1959)_

in i? Upp - (Jan - l > 1963)_I_I

/i (ReVl Jau - h 1-963)_

10 « Jan - !» 1963)_

3 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1963)..

h Parts: -

( Rev ‘ Jan. 1, 1963)_

( Rev - Jan - 1' I 963 )_

00 399 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1963)_

15 (Rp? d T (ReV - Jan - 1963)—-

16 m * Jan ‘ 1> 1963)..

6 (Rev. Jan. 1, I960)..

17 /p pp> (Jan. 1, 1963)_II]

17 (Rev. 1949)..

18 ( p^ PP . < Jan - 1. 1963)111111]
(Rev. Jan. 1, 1961)__

19 fp UPP ' (Jan * 1. 1963)

19 (^v. Jan. i. 1961) _.

20 ( ^ PP T (Jan - !• 1963)1111111“

MRev. jan. 1, 1961) _ ;

21 mp?\ (Jari - 1963).111111“

25 (Rev P j (Jan ‘ l ’ 1963)111111“

5W Jan ‘ !’ 1958)_I

p P- (Jan. 1, 1963).IIIIIII

Price
$4. 00

1.25
3.00
7.00
7. 00
4. 00

.60

.50

.60

1.75
4.00

.60

2.50

4.00
.70
6. 25
1.00

5.50
.65

4. 00
.55

3.25
1.00

.70

.60

1.00

.70

.65

.70

3.25
.50

4. 75
.70
4. 50
4. 75

4. 25

2.50
2.00
1.00
1.00

1.50
6. 50

.70

2.75
1.00

6.75
.50

5.50
.45

5. 50
.50

3.00

4.25
.60

3.00
.40
4. 50
.60

CFR Unit Price

26 Parts:

1 (§§ 1.0-1—1.400; Rev. Jan. 1,

1961) _$5.50

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)- .50

1 (§§ 1.401—1.860; Rev. Jan. 1,

1961) _ 5.50

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ .70

1 (§§ 1.861—end) to 19 (Rev. Jan.

1, 1961)_ 5.00

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ .50

20-29 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1961)_ 4.25

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ .35

30-39 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1961) ... 3.50

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ .30

40-169 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1961)_ 4.50

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)- .65

170-299 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1961)_ 6.25

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ .55

300-499 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1961)_ 4. 00

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ .35

500-599 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1961)_ 4.25

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)- .30

600-end (Rev. Jan. 1, 1961)_ 3.00

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ .30

27 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1961)_ 3.00

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ .30

28 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1963)_ .05

29 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1963)_ 2.50

30-31 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1959)_ 3.50

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ 1.00

32 Parts:

1-39 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1961)_ 5.50

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ 1.00

40-399 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1961)_ 4. 00

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ .55

400-589 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1962)_ 3.50

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ .35

590-699 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1962)_ 4.25

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ .40

700-799 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1962)_ 5.00

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ .35

800-999 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1960)_ 3.75

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ .60

1000-1099 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1963)_ 1.75

1100-end (Rev. Jan. 1, 1962)_ 4. 50

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ .35

32A (Rev. Jan. 1, 1958)_ 5.00

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ .65

33-34 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1962)_ 8.25

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ .50

35 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1960)_ 3.50

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ .35

36 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1960)_ 3.00

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ .40

37 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1960)_ 3.50

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ .30

38 (Rev. 1956)_ 8.00

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ 1.50

39 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1962)_ 5.25

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ 1.00

40-41 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1963)_ 2.50

42 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1960)_ 4.00

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ .50

43 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1963)_ 2. 50

44 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1960)_ 3.25

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ .40

45 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1960)_ 3.75

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ .50

46 Parts:

1-145 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1963)_ 8.00

146-149 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1963). 2.25

Supp. (July 1, 1963)_ .65

150-end (Rev. Jan. 1, 1958)_ 6.25

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ 1.25

47 Parts:

1-29 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1958)__ 7.50

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ 2.00

30-end (Rev. Jan. 1, 1958)_ 4.75

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ .45

48 Reserved

CFR Unit Price

49 Parts:

0-70 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1963)_$5.25

71-90 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1963)_ 2.75

91-164 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1958)_ 5.00

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ .55

165-end (Rev. Jan. 1, 1961)_ 5.00

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ .35

50 (Rev. Jan. 1, 1961)__ 3.75

Supp. (Jan. 1, 1963)_ .45

General Index (Rev. Jan. 1, 1963)_ .45

Title 6—AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT

Chapter V—Agricultural Marketing
Service, Department of Agriculture

SUBCHAPTER B—EXPORT AND DOMESTIC
CONSUMPTION PROGRAMS

PART 519—FRESH IRISH POTATOES

S u b p a r t—Fresh Irish Potatoes—
Livestock Feed Diversion Program
EMD 3a

Sec.

519.243 General statement.

519.244 Administration.

519.245 Area.

519.246 Period of program.

519.247 Rate of payment.

519.248 Eligibility for payment.

519.249 Application and approval for par¬

ticipation.

519.250 Performance bond.

519.251 Period of diversion.

519.252 Definition of diversion.

519.253 Diversion specifications.

519.254 Inspection and certificate of diver¬

sion.

519.255 Methods of feeding.

519.256 Claim for payment.

519.257 Compliance with program provi¬

sions.

519.258 Inspection of premises.

519.259 Records and accounts.

519.260 Set-off.

519.261 Joint payment or assignment.

519.262 Officials not to benefit.

519.263 Amendment and termination.

Authority: §§ 519.243 to 519.263 issued
under sec. 32, 49 Stat. 774, as amended; 7
U.S.C. 612c.

§ 519.243 General statement.

In order to encourage the domestic
consumption of fresh Irish potatoes
produced in the continental United
States by diverting them from normal
channels of trade and commerce, the
Secretary of Agriculture, pursuant to
the authority conferred by section 32 of
Public Law 320, 74th Congress, as
amended, offers to make payment for the
diversion of 1963 crop potatoes for use
as livestock feed, subject to the terms
and conditions hereinafter set forth. In¬
formation relating to this program and
forms prescribed for use hereunder may
be obtained from the following:

Fruit and Vegetable Division, Agricultural
Marketing Service, United States Department
of Agriculture, Washington, D.C., 20250.

11663

11664

RULES AND REGULATIONS

State Agricultural Stabilization and Con¬
servation Committees in the respective
States.

County Agricultural Stabilization and
Conservation Committees in the respective
counties.

§ 519.244 Administration.

The program provided for in this part
will be administered under the general
direction and supervision of the Director,
Fruit and Vegetable Division, Agricultur¬
al Marketing Service, and in the field
will be carried out by the Agricultural
Stabilization and Conservation Service
through the Agricultural Stabilization
and Conservation State Committees and
Agricultural Stabilization and Conserva¬
tion County Committees, hereinafter re¬
ferred to as State and County Commit¬
tees. Each State Committee will author¬
ize one or more employees of the State
Committee to act as representatives of
the United States Department of Agri¬
culture, hereinafter referred to as USDA,
to approve applications for participation.
State and County Committees or their
authorized representatives do not have
authority to modify or waive any of the
provisions of this subpart or any amend¬
ments or supplements to this subpart.

§ 519.245 Area.

This program will be effective in such
States or areas as may be designated
from time to time by the Director, Fruit
and Vegetable Division, Agricultural
Marketing Service, U.S. Department of
Agriculture. Information with respect
to the areas designated may be obtained
from the offices listed in § 519.243.

§ 519.246 Period of program.

This program will be effective from the
date of this announcement and continue
until further notice, but in any event
not later than April 30,1964.

§ 519.247 Rate of payment.

The rate of payment per 100 pounds
of potatoes which meet the require¬
ments of Specification A as defined in
§ 519.253 and which are diverted as pre¬
scribed in § 519.252 will be 50 cents per
hundredweight from the inception of
the program through December, 1963; 40
cents thereafter through February, 1964;
and 30 cents thereafter to termination
of the program. No payment will be
made for any fractional part of 100
pounds and such quantities shall be dis¬
regarded.

§ 519.248 Eligibility for payment.

Payments will be made under this pro¬
gram to any individual, partnership, as¬
sociation, or corporation located in the
continental* United States, (a) who ex¬
ecutes and files an application for par¬
ticipation on the prescribed form, (b)
who files a performance bond as pro¬
vided in § 519.250(c) whose application
is approved, (d) who diverts fresh Irish
potatoes within the State and county
specified in the approved application,
directly or through any other person or
persons, (e) who files claim as provided
in § 519.256 and (f) who complies with
all other conditions precedent to pay¬
ment contained in this subpart. The
Director may prescribe and publish fur¬

ther conditions of eligibility when
deemed desirable to assure that growers
are the primary recipients of program
benefits.

§ 519.249 Application and approval for
participation.

Persons desiring to participate in this
program must submit a written applica¬
tion on Form ASCS-117 “Application for
Participation in Fresh Irish Potato Live¬
stock Feed Diversion Program.” Each
applicant must submit a performance
bond as provided in § 519.250. Applica¬
tions and bonds should be submitted to
the County ASCS Office for the county
within which the potatoes are to be di¬
verted. Applications will be forwarded
to the State ASCS Office and will be con¬
sidered in the order received in the re¬
spective areas and in accordance with
the availability of funds. Applicants
will be notified of the approval or non¬
approval of their application. Approved
applications may be modified or amend¬
ed with the consent of the applicant and
the duly authorized representative of the
State Committee: Provided, That such
modification or amendment shall not be
in conflict with the provisions of this
subpart or any amendment or supple¬
ments hereto. An approved applicant is
hereinafter referred to as “the diverter.”

§ 519.250 Performance bond.

Each applicant shall submit with his
first application for participation a per¬
formance bond as further assurance that
the potatoes diverted pursuant to this
program will be used exclusively for feed¬
ing to livestock by methods prescribed
in § 519.255. The bond shall be exe¬
cuted on Form ASCS-119, “Performance
Bond”, by the principal and two indi¬
vidual sureties, all of whom shall agree
to indemnify USDA for any losses,
claims, or payments made by USDA with
respect to any quantity of such potatoes
not used for livestock feed. USDA may
disapprove any bond if for any reason
any surety does not in the opinion of
USDA afford USDA full protection and
security.

§ 519.251 Period of diversion.

The potatoes in connection with which
payments are to be made must be di¬
verted (a) after the date of approval of
the diverter’s application, (b) within
the time period specified in the approved
application, and (c) in any event on or
before the termination date of the
program.

§ 519.252 Definition of diversion.

Diversion of potatoes for use as live¬
stock feed as used herein means the ini¬
tial processing of potatoes for feeding to
livestock by ensiling, or by cutting, chop¬
ping, slicing, gouging, crushing, or cook¬
ing to the degree that (a) a minimum of
90 percent of the potatoes which are 2
inches in diameter or larger have been
seriously damaged to such an extent that
they will not meet the requirements of
U.S. No. 2 quality, and (b) the general
appearance of the lot as a whole has
been seriously damaged to such an ex¬
tent that, in the opinion of the inspector,
the potatoes are readily and obviously
identifiable as having been initially proc¬

essed and rendered unsuitable to enter
into normal channels of trade and com¬
merce as potatoes.

§ 519.253 Diversion specifications.

Potatoes in connection with which
payments will be made must meet the
requirements of “Specification A” which
is hereby defined as meaning potatoes
which are equal to or better than the
quality requirements of U.S. No. 2 grade,
and which have either a minimum di¬
ameter of 2 inches or a minimum weight
of 4 ounces, with no tolerance being
allowed for defects or undersize. Long
varieties of potatoes which by clipping
ends or second growth could be made to
meet the quality requirements of U.S.
No. 2 grade need not be so clipped to be
classed Specification A but the weight of
the portions which customarily would
be clipped off shall be deducted in de¬
termining the weight of those potatoes
in the lot which do meet the require¬
ments of Specification A. Notwithstand¬
ing the above, after consultation with
industry representatives, the Director
may exclude from meeting the require¬
ments of Specification A any additional
grades and sizes which otherwise would
meet the requirements of Specification
A. Any such exclusion will be set forth
in the application form for diversion au¬
thorization in the particular area to
which it is applicable.

§ 519.254 Inspection and certificate of
diversion.

Prior to diversion the potatoes shall be
inspected by an inspector authorized or
licensed by the Secretary of Agriculture
to inspect and certify the class, quality,
and condition of fresh Irish potatoes.
The diverter shall be responsible for re¬
questing and arranging for inspection
sufficiently in advance of the diversion
so that the inspector can be present to
determine the proportion of potatoes in
each lot which meet the quality require¬
ments of Specification A. The inspector
shall also verify the quantity of potatoes
being diverted and that such potatoes
have been diverted as defined in
§ 519.252. The diverter shall furnisn
such scale tickets, weighing facilities, or
volume measurements as determined oy
the inspector to be necessary for ascer¬
taining the net weight of the potatoes
being diverted. The cost of inspecting,
verifying the quantity, certifying
diversion has been performed, and iss '
ing certificates thereof shall be borne /
the diverter. Certificates shall be P '
pared on Form ASCS-118, “Invoice *n
Certificates of Inspection and Diversion.

§ 519.255 Methods of feeding.

Following the initial processing
specified in § 519.252, the potatoes-
be fed to livestock by one or more
following methods: . t

(a) Feeding in barns or feed * 0 r
rectly from troughs, bunkers, o
other suitable feeding receptacle,

(b) Spreading on pasture lam* 0 f
livestock are grazing, but the
spreading during any seven-day h
shall not exceed 500 pounds oi . P ^
per head of cattle or horses or zo v
per head of sheep or swine; or

FEDERAL REGISTER

11665

Friday, November 1, 1963

(c) Utilizing the potatoes for livestock
feed after dehydration through a process
of alternate freezing and thawing. This
method may be followed only in areas
suitable for this process as may be ap¬
proved by the Director, Fruit and Vege¬
table Division, and in addition to other
program requirements, the following spe¬
cial terms and conditions will be appli¬
cable to such method:

(1) The potatoes must be spread on
pasture consisting of sod or other grass¬
land and the land must be fenced. The
potatoes may not be spread on land under
the Soil Bank Program or on land con¬
sisting of diverted acreage under the
Feed Grain Program or the Wheat Sta¬
bilization Program. The land on which
the potatoes are spread may not be
plowed or otherwise cultivated until it is
determined by USDA that adequate pas¬
turing by livestock has taken place.

(2) The potatoes may be spread no
deeper than 4 inches at any point.

(3) Diversion payments will be com¬
puted at the rate in effect at the time of
initial processing and spreading but pay¬
ment to diverters by USDA will not be
made until it is determined by USDA that
adequate pasturing by livestock has
taken place.

(4) Spreading must take place on or
before February 28, 1964.

§ 519.256 Claim for payment.

In order to obtain payment the di¬
verter must submit a properly executed
“Invoice and Certificates of Inspection
and Diversion,” Form ASCS-118, to the
State ASCS Office which approved his
application. All such claims shall be
filed not later than one calendar month
after the termination date specified in
the applicable approved application.

§519.257 Compliance with program

provisions.

If USDA determines that any quantity
of Potatoes diverted under this program
J'as not used exclusively for livestock
ieed purposes, whether such failure was
caused directly by the diverter or by any
Person or persons, the diverter
nan not be entitled to diversion pay-
ents in connection with such potatoes,
all refund to USDA any payment made
sWi°F Ilec !' ion such Potatoes, and
dam. 1 ! able to USDA for any other
faiii a ^ es mcurred as a result of such
fnr if e 5° 1186 Potatoes exclusively
d r , Stock feed purposes. USDA may
Patli^ n fu diverter the ri ght to partici-
ceivn n thlS program or the right to re-
divprcF ayments in connection with any
Prnpro^ 1 previ ously made under this
that- USDA determines

or calico 7 diver ter has failed to use

tatoes d?vpvt b ^ US6d any quantity of po '

clusivelv fnt ed « Under this P r °gram ex-
^ethersueh f !^ estock feed Purposes,
by the failure was caused directly
or Person* e Ju? r or by any other person
in good fo-Fu t . he diver ter has not acted
fransactinn h j n conn cction with any
toe divertor u nd * r this Program, or (c)

any obw,n4 S failed to dischar e e fully
t hispr 0 4-o m 0n T , assumed by him under
re Presentatw. Pe . rsons making any mis-
*ith this n of facts in connection
S pr °gram for the purpose of de¬

frauding USDA will be subject to the ap¬
plicable civil and criminal provisions of
the United States Code.

§ 519.258 Inspection of premises.

The diverter shall permit authorized
representatives of USDA at any reasona¬
ble time to have access to his premises to
inspect and examine such potatoes as
are being diverted or stored for diver¬
sion, and to inspect and examine the
diverter’s facilities for diverting pota¬
toes, in order to determine to what ex¬
tent there is or has been compliance with
the provisions of this program.

§ 519.259 Records and accounts.

If the diverter sells or otherwise dis¬
poses of potatoes diverted pursuant to
this program to any other person or
persons for use as livestock feed, the di¬
verter shall keep accurate records and
accounts showing the details relative
to the diversion and disposition of such
potatoes. The diverter shall permit au¬
thorized representatives of USDA at any
reasonable time to inspect, examine, and
make copies of such records and accounts
in order to determine to what extent
there is or has been compliance with the
provisions of this program. Such rec¬
ords and accounts shall be retained by
the diverter for two years after date of
last payment to him under the pro¬
gram.

§ 519.260 Set-off.

If the diverter is indebted to USDA or
to any other agency of the United States,
set-off may be made against any amount
due the diverter hereunder. Setting off
shall not deprive the diverter of the right
to contest the justness of the indebted¬
ness involved, either by administrative
appeal or by legal action.

§ 519.261 Joint payment or assignment.

The diverter may name a joint payee
on the claim for payment or may as¬
sign, in accordance with the provisions
of the Assignment of Claims Act of
1940, Public Law 811, 76th Congress, as
amended (31 U.S.C. 203, 41 U.S.C. 15),
the proceeds of any claim to a bank, trust
company, Federal lending agency, or
other recognized financing institution:
Provided , That such assignment shall
be recognized only if and when the as¬
signee thereof files written notice of the
assignment with the authorized repre¬
sentative of USDA who approved the ap¬
plication, together with a true copy of
the instrument of assignment, in accord¬
ance with the instructions on Form CSS-
66 or ASCS-66 “Notice of Assignment,”
which form must be used in giving no¬
tice of assignment to USDA. The “In¬
strument of Assignment” may be ex¬
ecuted on Form CSS-347 or the assignee
may use his own form of assignment.
The CSS forms may be obtained from the
State ASCS Office or the Washington
office shown in § 519.243.

§ 519.262 Officials not lo benefit.

No member of or delegate to Congress,
or Resident Commissioner, shall be en¬
titled to any share or part of any con¬
tract resulting from this program or to
any benefits that may arise therefrom,
but this provision shall not be considered

to extend to such a contract if made with
a corporation for its general benefit or
to any such person acting in his capacity
as a farmer.

§ 519.263 Amendment and termination.

This subpart may be amended or ter¬
minated at any time but the amendment
or termination shall not be effective
earlier than the date of filing with the
Office of the Federal Register. No
amendment or termination shall be ap¬
plicable to any potatoes diverted before
the effective time of such amendment
or termination.

Note: The record-keeping and reporting
requirements contained herein have been
approved by, and subsequent requirements
will be subject to the approval of, the Bu¬
reau of the Budget in accordance with the
Federal Reports Act of 1942.

Dated: October 28,1963.

Floyd F. Hedlund,
Authorized Representative of the
Secretary of Agriculture.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11584; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;

8:48 a.m.J

Title 7—AGRICULTURE

Subtitle A—Office of the Secretary of
Agriculture

[Arndt. 12]

PART 5—determination of
PARITY PRICES

Ryegrass Seed

The regulations of the Secretary of
Agriculture with respect to the determi¬
nation of parity prices (21 F.R. 761, as
amended; 7 CFR 5.1-5.6) are amended
as hereinafter specified in order to dis¬
continue the calculation of parity prices
for common (annual) ryegrass seed and
perennial ryegrass seed.

1. In § 5.2, the paragraph under the
centerhead “Seed Crops” is amended by
deleting the words “common ryegrass”
and “perennial ryegrass”.

2. In § 5.4, the paragraph under the
centerhead “Seed Crops” is amended by
deleting the words “common ryegrass”
and “perennial ryegrass”.

(Sec. 301, 52 Stat. 38, as amended; 7 U.S.C.
1301)

Done at Washington, D.C., this 29th
day of October 1963.

Orville L. Freeman,
Secretary of Agriculture.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11630; Filed, Oct. 30, 1963;
1:00 p.m.]

Chapter IX—Agricultural Marketing
Service (Marketing Agreements and
Orders; Fruits, Vegetables, Tree
Nuts), Department of Agriculture

PART 970—CARROTS GROWN IN
SOUTH TEXAS

Miscellaneous Amendments

Notice of rule making with respect to
proposed amendments to the rules and
regulations effective under Marketing

11666

RULES AND REGULATIONS

Agreement No. 142 and Order No. 970,
both as amended (7 CFR Part 970) was
published in the October 12, 1963, Fed¬
eral Register (28 F.R. 10975). This pro¬
gram regulates the handling of carrots
grown in designated counties in South
Texas and is effective under the Agricul¬
tural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937,
as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674).

The notice afforded interested persons
an opportunity to file data, views, or
arguments pertaining thereto within
seven days after publication. None was
filed.

After consideration of all relevant mat¬
ters, including the proposal set forth in
the aforesaid notice which was recom¬
mended by the South Texas Carrot Com¬
mittee, established pursuant to the mar¬
keting agreement and order, present
§§ 970.120-970.125 are deleted; § 970.126
Handling of culls is renumbered as
§ 970.127; and new §§ 970.120-970.126
are inserted to read as follows:

§ 970.120 Policy.

(a) Special purpose shipments.
Whenever special purpose shipments
are relieved from regulation, the Com¬
mittee may require information on the
manner, methods and timing of the
shipments, including the information re¬
quired to obtain the Certificate of Privi¬
lege.

(b) Carrots grown outside the produc¬
tion area. Whenever carrots grown out¬
side the production area are packed
within the production area, they must
meet current regulation requirements
unless they are handled as a distinct en¬
tity in accordance with these safeguards.
The Committee may require informa¬
tion on the origin, quantity and method
of handling, including the information
required to obtain the Certificate of
Privilege.

§ 970.121 Qualification.

Each handler of carrots handling spe¬
cial purpose shipments or packing car¬
rots grown outside the production area
must qualify by obtaining a Certificate
of Privilege from the Committee and file
all reports requested by the Committee.

§ 970.122 Application for certificate of
privilege.

(a) Application forms are furnished
by the Committee. Each application
shall contain the name and address of
the handler; the quantity by grade and
size; the mode of transportation; the
consignee; the destination; the purpose
for which the carrots are to be used; a
certification that the information shown
is true; and any other information
deemed necessary by the Committee. In
shipments for export the Committee may
require a copy of the Department of
Commerce Shippers Export Declaration
Form No. 7527-V.

(b) In case of carrots packed but not
grown within the production area, each
application shall contain the information
required by paragraph (a) of this section
and further: provide evidence of pro¬
duction outside the production area
(§ 970.4). This may be evidenced by a
certification of origin of shipment,
quantity and carrier issued by the Fed¬
eral or Federal-State Inspection Service.

§ 970.123 Approval.

The Committee or its agent shall give
prompt consideration to each application
for a Certificate of Privilege and issue the
certificate if the information made avail¬
able to the Committee supports approval.
The certificate shall cover a specified
period and, in case of special purpose
shipments, specify the consignee, quan¬
tity and purpose of shipment.

§ 970.124 Separate handling for out¬
side carrots.

Unless carrots grown outside the pro¬
duction area meet current regulation re¬
quirements, each handler packing such
carrots shall: (a) Evidence to the Fed¬
eral-State Inspection Service that such
carrots are not commingled with produc¬
tion area carrots by maintaining physical
separation of outside carrots and pro¬
duction area carrots throughout receipt,
packing, or other preparation for market,
(b) Identify outside carrots as to the
State or area where grown, or the country
of origin if imported, by labeling or other
appropriate identification on the con¬
tainers or packages.

§ 970.125 Reports.

Each handler of carrots shipping un¬
der Certificates of Privilege shall report
to the Committee the name and address
of the shipper; the car or truck identi¬
fication; the loading point; destination;
consignee; the inspection certificate
number when inspection is required; and
any other information requested by the
Committee.

§ 970.126 Disqualification.

The Committee may conduct surveys of
handling of carrots requiring Certifi¬
cates of Privilege to determine whether
handlers are complying with the regu¬
lations. Whenever the Committee finds
that the handler or consignee is failing
to comply with the regulations, Certifi¬
cates of Privilege issued such handler
may be rescinded and subsequent certifi¬
cates denied. The disqualification shall
be for a period of time, as determined by
the Committee, but in no event shall it
extend beyond the date of the succeeding
fiscal period. Any handler who has a
Certificate rescinded or denied may ap¬
peal to the Committee in writing for
reconsideration of his disqualification.

Findings. It is hereby found that good
cause exists for not postponing the ef¬
fective date of this section until 30 days
after publication in the Federal Register
(5 U.S.C. 1003) in that (1) shipments of
1963-64 crop carrots grown in the pro¬
duction area will begin on or about the
effective date, (2) to maximize benefits
to growers, this amendment should apply
to as many shipments of carrots as possi¬
ble during this season, (3) handlers have
been aware of possible requirements
under these rules and regulations since
October 1962 when a hearing was held
on proposed amendments to the market¬
ing agreement and order which amend¬
ments became effective August 22, 1963,
and since the Committee’s recommenda¬
tion September 25, 1963, (4) the period
intervening has provided sufficient time
for preparation, and (5) notice has been
given of the proposed amendments set
forth in these sections through publicity

in the production area and by publica¬
tion in the Federal Register October 12
1963 (28 F.R. 10975).

(Secs. 1-19, 48 Stat. 31, as amended; 7 U.S.C
601 et seq.)

Effective date. Dated October 29 ,
1963, to become effective November 3
1963.

Floyd F. Hedlund,

Director,

Fruit and Vegetable Division.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11582; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;
8:48 a.m.]

PART 970—CARROTS GROWN IN
SOUTH TEXAS

Limitation of Shipments

Notice of rule making with respect to
a proposed limitation of shipments regu¬
lation to be made effective under Market¬
ing Agreement No. 142 and Marketing
Order No. 970, both as amended (7 CFR
Part 970; 28 F.R. 7467, 7584), regulating
the handling of carrots grown in certain
designated counties of South Texas, was
published in the Federal Register Octo¬
ber 12, 1963 (28 F.R. 10975). This pro¬
gram is effective under the Agricultural
Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as
amended (7 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).

The notice afforded interested persons
an opportunity to file data, views, or ar¬
guments pertaining thereto within seven
days after publication. None was filed.

After consideration of all relevant mat¬
ters, including the proposal set forth in
the aforesaid notice, it is hereby found
that the limitation of shipments regu¬
lation, as hereinafter set forth, will
maintain orderly marketing tending to
increase returns to producers of such

carrots

It is hereby further found that good
cause exists for not postponing the ef¬
fective date of this section until 30 days
after publication in the Federal Reg¬
ister (5 U.S.C. 1003) in that (1) ship¬
ments of carrots grown in the productio
area are expected to begin on or aoou
the effective date of this section, (2)
maximize benefits to growers this regu¬
lation should apply to all shipments
carrots during the 1963-1964 se ? ,s0 . n l -
special preparation on the part of n
dlers is not required because the n
dling of carrots in the South T®** 5 p th l
duction area has been regulated for _
past three seasons, and (4) none
been given of the proposed Limn
of Shipments set forth in this s
through publicity in the prodrietion
and by publication in the *
Register October 12, 1963

F.R

10975).

§ 970.304 Limitation of shipments.

During the period from November
1963, through June 30, 1964, no P
shall handle any lot of carrots s ^
in the production area unless su ^
rots meet the grade requiem, one
paragraph (a) of this section,
of the size designations of p ^ he c0 n-
(b) of this section, and meet ,

tainer and pack requirements
graphs (c) and (d) of this sectio ,
less such carrots are handled i

Friday, November 1, 1963

FEDERAL REGISTER

11667

ance with provisions of paragraphs (e),
(f), (g), and (h) of this section.

(a) Minimum grade requirements.
U.S. No. 1, or better.

(b) Sizing requirements —(1) 1Medi¬
um-Marge. % inch minimum diameter
to 1% inches maximum diameter, 5 y 2
inches minimum length, with an average
of 30 percent by count 1 inch minimum
diameter or larger and no sample with
less than 15 percent by count 1 inch or
larger in diameter.

(2) Jumbos . 1 inch minimum diam¬
eter to 3 inches maximum diameter and
5% inches minimum length.

Carrots may be handled only in con¬
tainers classified by weight as follows:

(i) 1 pound;

(ii) 2 pounds;

(hi) 25 pounds;

(iv) 50 pounds; and

(v) 75-80 pounds.

(2> “Jumbos,” as specified in para¬
graph (b) (2) of this section, may be
handled only in 25, 50, and 75-80 pound

containers.

(3) The container requirements of
this paragraph shall not, but the pack
requirements of paragraph (d) of this
section shall, be applicable to carrots
handled for export.

(d) Pack requirements. (1) Master
containers for 1 pound or 2 pound pack¬
ages shall contain the following number
of packages only :
ji) 24 1 pound packages;
ju) 48 1 pound packages; or
(llp . 24 2 pound packages.

(2) (i) Average gross weight of master
^ to be computed by multi¬
plying the allowable number of packages
serein by their weight classification,
in respective tare allowances added,
are allowances for crates, or their
quivalents in other containers, are 4
Pounds for crates Nos. 4015 and 3820,
™ 2 pounds for crate No. 5055. Crate
resignations are carrier numbers.
wi h U) ^tf containers of packages
iin the following weight classifications

?rnL n ^ . w ?i gh more than their average
ances . we ght * P lus the following toler-

1 Pound packages, 22.5 percent.

Dounri^ 61 *! 1 pound and including
h packages, 15 percent.

(iin°r. er 2 pound Packages, 10 percei
more mo tai . ners wei e h mg 25 pounds
Percent nf £ 0t excee< ? an average of
(e^ m* tbe ne * weight of contents,
to quantities. Pursua:

these regular 2) any person subject
e xport e ^n at + 10n l may handle, except f
bounds nf P t0 but not to exceed H
without ' ar J° ts per calendar mon
this sectinrf ard + the re QUirements
sessment ven *- to the ins Poction and a
this excenH^ lrements of this part, b
Portion of * not appl 7 to ai
Pounds of carrots! liPment ° f ° Ver 11

1 g carr °ts not grown ■
not grown S’ Carr °ts packed, bi
s hall m eet ’ .^hm the production ar<
6ra Phs (ai iu. rec,u ^ reme ntB of pars
^MonunieJih’ (c) > and (d > of th
ln ct entitv are handled as a di;
JPards y ® accordance with safe
^■U66 5 ) er §§ 970.120-970.126. C

(g) Special purpose shipments. The
requirements set forth in paragraphs
(a), (b), (c), and (d) of this section, and
the inspection and assessment require¬
ments of this part, shall not be appli¬
cable to carrots handled for:

(i) Canning or freezing ;

(ii) Relief or charity;

(iii) Experimental purposes; and

(iv) Livestock feed within the produc¬
tion area only if mechanically mutilated
in accordance with § 970.126 Handling
of culls (28 F.R. 906).

(h) Safeguards. Each handler of
carrots failing to meet the requirements
of paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d)
of this section, which (1) are packed
but not grown within the production area
under paragraph (f) of this section, or
(2) are handled for canning or freezing,
relief or charity, or experimental pur¬
poses under paragraph (g) of this section
shall, prior to handling, apply for and
obtain a Certificate of Privilege from
the Committee. This shall require the
handler to furnish reports and docu¬
ments as the Committee may require
showing that the carrots were handled
in accordance with conditions specified
in the certificate. Certificates are not
required on carrots for canning or freez¬
ing if processed within Cameron, Starr,
Willacy, and Hidalgo Counties.

(i) Inspection. (1) No handler may
handle any carrots for which inspection
is required unless an appropriate inspec¬
tion certificate has been issued with
respect thereto and the certificate is
valid at the time of shipment.

(2) No handler may transport or cause
the transportation of any shipment of
carrots by motor vehicle for which an
inspection certificate is required unless
each shipment is accompanied by a copy
of the inspection certificate applicable
thereto.

(3) For administration of this part
each inspection certificate is valid for
only 72 hours following completion of
inspection as shown on the certificate.

(j) Definitions. The term “U.S. No.
1” shall have the same meaning as set
forth in the U.S. Standards for Topped
Carrots (§§ 51.2360-51.2381 of this title)
including the tolerances set forth therein
with the following exceptions: (1) For
packages which contain 5 pounds or
less, a composite sample of 50 carrots
will be scored and restricted to double
the tolerances for defects and off-size,
provided that no more than one carrot
which is affected by soft rot will be per¬
mitted in any package, and (2) for pack¬
ages of more than 5 pounds the percent¬
ages of defects and off-size shall be
calculated on the basis of count. All
other terms used in this section shall
have the same meaning as when used
in Marketing Agreement No. 142, and
Order No. 970, both as amended (Part
970 of this title).

(Secs. 1-19, 48 Stat. 31, as amended; 7 U.S.C.
601 et seq.)

Dated October 29, 1963, to become ef¬
fective November 3,1963.

Floyd F. Hedlund,

Director ,

Fruit and Vegetable Division.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11583; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;

8:48 a.m.]

Chapter XIV —Commodity Credit Cor¬
poration, Department of Agriculture
SUBCHAPTER C—EXPORT PROGRAMS

PART 1485—DAIRY PRODUCTS

Subpart—Dairy Products Export
Paymenf-in-Kind Program——Terms
and Conditions (SM-7)

General

Sec.

1485.201 General statement.

Requirements for Participation

1485.205 General provisions.

1485.206 Registration of sales.

1485.207 Exporter’s agreement with CCC.

1485.208 Inspection of dairy products at

time of production and at time
of loading for export.

1485.209 Exportation requirements.

1485.210 Quantity tolerance.

1485.211 Export payment rates.

1485.212 Determination of rates.

Dairy Products Export Payment Certificate

1485.215 Application for dairy products ex¬

port payment.

1485.216 Evidence of sale.

1485.217 Documents required as evidence of

export.

1485.218 Description of certificate.

Redemption of Dairy Products Export
Payment Certificate

1485.220 General provisions.

1485.221 Redemption value of certificates.

1485.222 Sales of eligible commodities for

dairy products export payment
certificates.

Miscellaneous Provisions

1485.225 Covenant against contingent fees.

1485.226 Performance guarantee.

.1485.227 Good faith.

1485.228 Assignments.

1485.229 Records and accounts.

1485.230 Reports.

1485.231 ASCS Commodity offices.

1485.232 Officials not to benefit.

1485.233 Amendment and termination.

1485.234 Setoff.

Definitions

1485.240 Eligible country or designated

country.

1485.241 Export and exportation.

1485.242 Exporter.

1485.243 Milk or nonfat dry milk.

1485.244 Butter.

1485.245 Mllkfat products.

1485.246 Foreign buyer.

1485.247 Date of sale.

Authority: §§ 1485.201 to 1485.247 issued
under secs. 4 and 5, 62 Stat. 1070, 1072, 15
U.S.C. 714 b and c.

Editorial Note : Part 1485 is amended from
“Nonfat dry milk’* to “Dairy products."

These regulations set forth the terms and
conditions of the Dairy Products Export Pay¬
ment-In-Kind Program and supersede the
regulations governing the Nonfat Dry Milk
Export Payment-In-Kind Program, SM-7 (28
CFR Part 1136), with respect to sales made
on and after the effective date of this sub-
part.

General

§ 1485.201 General statement.

Commodity Credit Corporation (re¬
ferred to herein as “CCC”) pursuant to
this subpart announces a Dairy Products
Export Payment-In-Kind Program (re¬
ferred to herein as the “program”) un¬
der which an exporter who has exported
from commercial sources pursuant to a
registered sale as provided in § 1485.206,
(a) U.S. Extra grade spray process non-

11668

RULES AND REGULATIONS

fat dry milk (referred to in this subpart
as “milk”), (b) U.S. Grade A butter (re¬
ferred to in this subpart as “butter”),
(c) Milkfat products, equal in quality to
U.S. Grade A butter and containing not
less than 75 percent of milkfat, may ap¬
ply for payment in the form of a ne¬
gotiable certificate (referred to herein
as “certificate”) which is redeemable in
milk, butter, Cheddar cheese, wheat, rice
or feed grains held in the inventory of
CCC. Such commodities delivered in
redemption of certificates must also be
exported. Certificates may be redeemed
at face value, except as provided in this
subpart. Dairy products obtained from
CCC for export, or dairy products ex¬
ported in lieu thereof, shall not be eligi¬
ble for certificates. Wheat, feed grains,
and rice delivered in redemption of cer¬
tificates will be priced according to the
prevailing pricing policies set forth in
the payment-in-kind program regula¬
tions for such commodities. The pro¬
gram will be carried out by the Foreign
Agricultural Service (referred to herein
as “FAS”), and by the Agricultural
Stabilization and Conservation Service
(referred to herein as “ASCS”), United
States Department of Agriculture and
will be administered under the general
direction and supervision of the General
Sales Manager, FAS. Information per¬
taining to the program may be obtained
from the Office of the General Sales
Manager, Washington, D.C., and the
Minneapolis ASCS Commodity Office.

Requirements for Participation
§ 1485.205 General provisions.

(a) Exporters desiring to participate
in this program shall register sales made
by them to foreign buyers of eligible
dairy products for export with the Office
of the General Sales Manager, FAS.
That office will acknowledge acceptable
sales.

(b) Dairy products exported under
this program must have been processed
in the United States from milk produced
in the United States.

(c) Dairy products shall be exported
under this program only to an eligible
country as defined in § 1485.240, and
such dairy products so exported shall not
be transshipped or caused to be trans¬
shipped by the exporter to any country
other than an eligible country.

(d) To be eligible for certificates un¬
der this program, the exporter must
make application for certificates and fur¬
nish documentary evidence of sale and
evidence of export of a quantity of dairy
products, as required in §§ 1485.215,
1485.216, and 1485.217, which evidence
has not been used, or will not subse¬
quently be used as evidence of export in
connection with any other agreement
entered into pursuant to § 1485.207 or in
connection with any export program un¬
der which CCC has paid or has agreed to
pay an export allowance, or in connec¬
tion with any other export program
which involves the sale of dairy products
by CCC at prices which reflect any ex¬
port allowance or in connection with a
CCC barter transaction. Nothing herein
shall be construed as precluding expor¬
tations of dairy products under this pro¬
gram in fulfillment of Purchase Authori¬

zations pursuant to Public Law 480, 83d
Congress.

§ 1485.206 Registration of sales.

To be eligible for certificates here¬
under, a sale of dairy products for ex¬
port from commercial sources shall be
registered by the exporter with CCC
through the office of the General Sales
Manager, FAS, Washington, D.C., 20250
by submitting an original and two copies
of a properly executed Notice of Sale,
Form CCC-138. Telegraphic notice of
sale will be acceptable provided all data
is included in the telegram that is re¬
quired by Form CCC-138 and further
provided the telegraphic notice is con¬
firmed by submission of a properly exe¬
cuted Form CCC-138 to the Office of the
General Sales Manager. Form CCC-138
must be submitted to the Office of the
General Sales Manager not later than
ten business days after the date of ex¬
port sale. An extension of a period for
a registration shall be at the discretion
of the General Sales Manager, upon
showing to his satisfaction that failure
to register was without fault or negli¬
gence of the exporter. Sales entered into
prior to the date of issuance of this reg¬
ulation shall not be eligible to be regis¬
tered hereunder. Upon receipt of an
acceptable Form CCC-138, a registration
number will be assigned by the Office of
the General Sales Manager, and an ac¬
knowledgement copy of the form show¬
ing such registration number will be
returned to the exporter. The exporter
shall promptly notify the Office of the
General Sales Manager of any error on
a Form CCC-138 or of any amendment
to an export sale contract. All communi¬
cations pertaining to a sale previously
registered with CCC for which a regis¬
tration number has been assigned shall
contain reference to the registration
number.

§ 1485.207 Exporter’s agreement with
CCC.

The submission of a Form CCC-138 by
an exporter and the assignment of a
registration number by the Office of the
General Sales Manager shall constitute
an agreement by the exporter to export
during the period shown on the Form
CCC-138 to destinations in eligible
countries, the quantity of dairy prod¬
ucts shown on such Form CCC-138 and
to submit satisfactory evidence of sale
and exportation as required in §§ 1485.-
216 and 1485.217 in consideration of the
undertaking by CCC to issue a certificate
(Form CCC-134) to the exporter.

§ 1485.208 Inspection of dairy products
at time of production and at time of
loading for export.

(a) The exporter shall obtain an in¬
spection certificate which shall have been
issued by the Inspection and Grading
Branch, Dairy Division, Agricultural
Marketing Service (referred to herein
as “AMS”) within 90 days of the time of
export, showing the weight and quality
of the commodity for submission with
the application for payment.

(b) The exporter shall also obtain
from AMS through his own arrangements
a grading certificate covering the inspec¬
tion of the commodity at dockside or

border port of entry showing the quan¬
tity of the product, condition of the con¬
tainers and verification that the prod¬
uct being exported is the same as that
reported on the quality and weight in¬
spection certificates provided for in par¬
agraph (a) of this section, for submission
with the application for payment.

(c) In the case of exports shipped
across the U.S. border by truck or rail¬
road the dairy products may be inspected
at the point of loading and sealed under
supervision of AMS. The certificates
resulting from such inspection will be
accepted in lieu of certificates obtained
under paragraph (b) of this section.

§ 1485.209 Exportation requirements.

(a) The exporter shall export or cause
exportation within the period stated in
the Form CCC-138 registered with CCC
or within any extension thereof approved
in writing by the Office of the General
Sales Manager, FAS, of dairy products
to an eligible country as defined in
§ 1485.240, in accordance with his agree¬
ment with CCC. If an extension of the
export period is approved, it may be
made subject to such terms and condi¬
tions as may be determined by the Gen¬
eral Sales Manager, FAS.

(b) Exportation of dairy products by
or to a United States Government agen¬
cy, to or in a destination defined as an
eligible country in § 1485.240 shall not
qualify as an exportation to an eligible
country for the purposes of this pro¬
gram. (United States Government agen¬
cy means any corporation wholly owned
by the Federal Government and any de¬
partment, bureau, administration or
other unit of the Federal Government
as, for example, the Departments of the
Army, Navy, and Air Force, the Agency
for International Development, the
Army and Air Force Exchange Service,
the Navy exchanges, and the Panama
Canal Company.) Sales to foreign buy¬
ers, including foreign governments, fi¬
nanced with funds made available by a
United States Government agency such
as the Agency for International Develop¬
ment or the Export-Import Bank, are not
sales to a United States Government
agency, provided the dairy products are
not for transfer by such buyer to a
United States Government agency.

(c) The exporter shall promptly ij"*
nish to CCC the evidence of sale and L tne
evidence of exportation. Failure to iu *
nish such evidence within 60 ca . le ^
days from the last date of the period 1
exportation shown on the Form CCC-
or from the last date of any exten f cll .
in time for exportation approved pur
ant to paragraph (a) of this sect J
shafi constitute prima facie evidence

failure to export. vnnr {

(d) Failure of the exporter to expo
in accordance with the provisions o
agreement with CCC shall cor ^tu
default of his obligations to CCC.
portation of the agreed quantity 01 hin
products to an eligible eountry , g
the period of time specified in eXP ~ ttier
agreement with CCC, or within a■ ^

period approved pursuant to P a J ° 0 f
(a) of this section are of the essen*
the agreement and are condition p this
dent to any right to payment un eX .
program. If the exporter does

FEDERAL REGISTER

11669

Friday , November 1 , 1963

port the quantity of dairy products speci¬
fied in the exporter’s agreement with
CCC, the exporter shall be liable for any
damages suffered by CCC as the result of
such breach. In addition to being liable
for any damages suffered by CCC for
failure to export dairy products within
the agreed period, an exporter may be
suspended and may be denied the right
to receive certificates.

(e) If the exportation of any dairy
products pursuant to the exporter’s
agreement with CCC does not qualify
as an exportation to an eligible country,
or if any dairy products exported are
reentered into the United States, includ¬
ing Puerto Rico, regardless of whether
such reentry is caused by the exporter*
or if any dairy products exported are
transshipped or caused to be trans¬

shipped by the exporter to any country
excluded by § 1485.240, the exporter shall
be in default and shall return to CCC
any certificates issued by CCC in pay¬
ment for export of such dairy products
or shall refund to CCC the face value of
such certificates in cash and, with re¬
spect to any dairy products reentered
into the United States, including Puerto
Rico, shall pay to CCC any damages as
provided in paragraph (d) of this sec¬
tion. The exporter shall not be subject
to such damages if he established to the
satisfaction of CCC that (1) the reentry
was not due to his fault or negligence
and promptly after he received notice
of reentry he subsequently exported a
Quantity of dairy products in fulfillment
0 . J“ be requirements of his agreement
with CCC equal to that which was re¬
entered, or (2) the dairy products re-
entered were lost, damaged, or destroyed
ana the physical condition is such that
weir reentry will not impair CCC’s ex¬
port and price support programs.

§ 1485.210 Quantity tolerance.

In the event the exporter exports or
ri fl ^ eS ex 5 0rtation of a net quantity of
tif v Z r , pr ?? u J c t ,s less than the net quan-
wiafrSv? 6 ? 111 the ex P° rter ’ s agreement
but not less than 95 percent
bp quantit y> the exporter shall not

event a med to be in default - m the
ent a n exporter exports or causes ex-

the net* 1 ° £ a net quant ity greater than
doi-w quanti ty provided in the ex-
ttce« lf g , r ^ ment with ccc ' but not in
he m av L 1 ? 5 J percent °I such quantity,
% m in s include such overshipped quan-
and a PPhcation for a certificate
thec^n ? U ? ntity may be included in
*rtificatetotiiS? am ° Unt ° f ^

' 1483-211 Export payment rates.

milk and Wf ment / ates for nonfat dry
such rafpJ att ^ r ? nd the period for which
Bounced in effect will be an-

Period ann! the expira tion of such a
of an exDort rv ami0Uncement will be made
for 5 rate and the Period

hounceinent^* 1 wil1 be in e:ffect - An-
and perinrfcf * expor t payment rates
rates will ho f ° r which sucl1 payment
the Offiop nf f? effec t will be issued by
^As, Wa*v * Genera l Sales Manager,
DC -’ 20250 > b y USD A
rat esmav h!* DllTerent export payment
0r coastal are-s 110111106 ^ f ° r specific P orts
‘ 214 -—

§ 1485.212 Determination of rates.

The rate in effect at the time of sale to
a foreign buyer or the rate in effect at
the time of registration of the Notice
of Sale as required by § 1485.206, which¬
ever rate is the lower, shall be the rate
applicable to the export sale. The sup¬
porting evidence of sale submitted by
the exporter in the form described in
§ 1485.216 shall be the basis for determin¬
ing the time of sale.

Dairy Products Export Payment Cer¬
tificate

§ 1485.215 Application for dairy prod¬
ucts export payment.

An original and two copies of Appli¬
cation for Dairy Products Export Pay¬
ment, Form CCC-135, must be prepared
and submitted to the Minneapolis ASCS
Commodity Office, together with the evi¬
dence of the weight and quality or grade
as provided in § 1485.208 (a), (b), or (c),
and evidence of sale as provided in
§ 1485.216, and the evidence of exporta¬
tion as provided in § 1485.217. Such evi¬
dence must be submitted within 60 days
after the last date for export provided in
CCC Form-138 or during an extension of
that period for export as provided in
§ 1485.209(a).

§ 1485.216 Evidence of sale.

Supporting evidence of sale, reflecting
time of sale in one copy only must be
submitted with the Application for Dairy
Products Export Payment and the evi¬
dence of exportation. Such evidence of
sale may be in the form of certified true
copies of offer and acceptance or other
documentary evidence of sale including
certified true copies of contracts between
exporter and buyer. In transactions in¬
volving an intermediate party, the evi¬
dence of sale required is certified true
copies of all documents evidencing the
sales which are exchanged between the
exporter, the intermediate party and the
buyer shown on the Notice of Sale, and
any additional documentation specifi¬
cally requested by the Director of the
Minneapolis ASCS Commodity Office.

§ 1485.217 Documents required as evi¬
dence of export.

(a) Each Application for Dairy Prod¬
ucts Export Payment, Form CCC-135,
must be supported by the following docu¬
ments evidencing export as applicable:
(1) Subject to the provisions of subpara¬
graph (3) of this paragraph, if export is
by water, or air, a non-negotiable dupli¬
cate copy of the applicable on-board
commercial bill of lading signed by an
agent of the export carrier, which shows
the net weight of the dairy product, the
identification of the export carrier, and
that the dairy product is destined to an
eligible country. A bill of lading showing
the gross weight of the dairy product
and the number of containers may be
furnished, provided the bill of lading also
shows the weight of the containers or the
exporter furnishes an acceptable certi¬
fication as to the weight of the contain¬
ers. If exported under Public Law 480,
83d Congress, the purchase authoriza¬
tion number shall be shown on the bill of
lading. Where loss, destruction, or dam¬
age to the dairy product occurs subse¬

quent to loading aboard the export car¬
rier but prior to issuance of on-board
bill of lading, one copy of a loading tally
sheet or acceptable similar document
may be substituted for the bill of lading.
(2) Subject to the provisions of subpara¬
graph (3) of this paragraph, if export is
by rail or truck, and not under Public
Law 480, 83d Congress, a Shipper’s Ex¬
port Declaration, authenticated by a rep¬
resentative of the Bureau of Customs at
the port of export, which identifies the
shipment(s), the date of clearance into
the foreign country, the gross weight of
the dairy product, and the weight of the
containers. If export is under Public
Law 480, 83d Congress, one unauthenti¬
cated copy of Shipper’s Export Declara¬
tion (or photostat of an unauthenticated
copy) which shall bear a statement cer¬
tified by the exporter that, “The authen¬
ticated copy of this Shipper’s Export
Declaration was forwarded to (name of
banking institution) with my draft for
financing of the shipment under P.A. No.
-” (3) If the export ship¬
ment is made by vessel, plane, truck, or
other carrier, operated by a United
States Government agency, then in lieu
of the bill of lading or Shipper’s Export
•Declaration provided for in subpara¬
graphs (1) and (2) of this paragraph,
the exporter may submit a certificate is¬
sued by an authorized official or employee
of such agency showing the date of ship¬
ment (s) , type of carrier used, identifica¬
tion of the commodity, and the quantity.
(4) Such additional evidence of export
as CCC may require under the circum¬
stances of any particular transaction to
enable CCC to determine that there has
been compliance with the export require¬
ments hereof.

(b) If the shipper or consignor named
in the on-board bill(s) of lading or the
Shipper’s Export Declaration (s) is other
than the exporter named in the offer to
export, waiver by such shipper or con¬
signor of any interest in the application
for payment in favor of such exporter is
required. Such waiver must clearly
identify the on-board bill(s) of lading
or Shipper’s Export Declaration(s) sub¬
mitted to evidence export.

(c) Where exportation of the dairy
product has been made by anyone or
transshipment made or caused by the
exporter to one or more countries or
areas to which a validated license is re¬
quired by the Bureau of International
Programs, U.S. Department of Com¬
merce, the bills of lading or other perti¬
nent documentary evidence required to
be furnished to CCC shall identify the
license by number issued by the Bureau
of International Programs, U.S. Depart¬
ment of Commerce, for such movement.

(d) In case a single bill of lading or
other documentary evidence of export
covers more than the net quantity of the
dairy product which is applied against
the exporter’s agreement with CCC, and
such documentary evidence of export is
to be used as evidence of export of such
excess quantity in connection with a dif¬
ferent agreement with CCC under this
program, or under any other export pro¬
gram of CCC pursuant to which CCC had
paid or agreed to pay an export allow¬
ance or has sold dairy products at prices
which reflect any export allowance, each

-2

11670

RULES AND REGULATIONS

copy of such documentary evidence of
export submitted pursuant to paragraph

(a) of this section shall be accompanied
by a statement certified by the exporter
identifying all agreements or contracts
with CCC to which the documentary evi¬
dence of export has been or will be ap¬
plied and the quantity applicable to each
agreement or contract.

§ 1485.218 Description of certificate.

Upon receipt of an Application for
Dairy Products Export Payment, Form
CCC-135, satisfactory evidence of sale
and evidence of export, and inspection
certificates provided for in § 1485.208 (a),

(b) or (c), the Minneapolis ASCS Com¬
modity Office will determine the amount
of payment due and issue to the exporter
a Dairy Products Export Payment Cer¬
tificate, Form CCC-134, herein referred
to as “certificate”, for the amount due.
Each certificate will be subject to the
provisions contained therein and the ap¬
plicable provisions of this subpart.

(a) Payee. The certificate will be is¬
sued only to the exporter whose Notice
of Sale, Form CCC-138, has been regis¬
tered.

(b) Face value. The amount shown
in the space provided for the face value
of the certificate will be the amount ob¬
tained by multiplying one of the follow¬
ing:

(1) The number of pounds of conven¬
tional nonfat dry milk or low lactose
nonfat dry milk exported by the appli¬
cable export payment rate for nonfat
dry milk in effect at the time of sale or
registration whichever is the lower.

(2) The number of pounds of instant
nonfat dry milk exported by the appli¬
cable export payment rate for nonfat dry
milk in effect at the time of sale or at
the time of registration whichever is
lower, however, when the moisture con¬
tent exceeds 4 percent, the net export
weight shall be adjusted downward to a
4 percent moisture basis.

(3) The number of pounds of butter
or milkfat products exported adjusted
to a basis of 80 percent milkfat by the
export payment rate for butter in effect
at the time of sale or registration, which¬
ever is lower.

Redemption of Dairy Products Export
Payment Certificate

§ 1485.220 General provisions.

The certificate will be redeemable in
milk, Cheddar cheese, or butter, which
CCC makes available from its stocks for
sale under Announcements LD-33 and
LD-35, and any amendments or revisions
thereof, or will be redeemable in feed
grains pursuant to the terms and condi¬
tions of Revision I of the Feed Grain Ex¬
port Program—Payment-In-Kind (GR-
368) (24 F.R. 7092) and any subsequent
amendments thereto, or will be redeem¬
able in wheat pursuant to the terms and
conditions of Revision III of the Wheat
Export Program—Payment-In-Kind
(GR-345) and any subsequent amend¬
ments thereto, or will be redeemable in
rice pursuant to the terms and conditions
of Revision II of the Rice Export Pro¬
gram—Payment-In-Kind (GR-369) (26
F.R. 967). The certificate may be pre¬
sented to the ASCS Commodity Offices

which are designated in § 1485.231 to re¬
deem certificates in milk, Cheddar cheese,
butter, wheat, rice or feed grains. The
certificate may be transferred to other
persons by endorsement.

§ 1485.221 Redemption value of certifi¬
cates.

A certificate will be accepted by CCC
at face value if applied to a purchase
contract with CCC dated within 180 days
after date of issuance shown on the
certificate for the purchase of milk,
Cheddar cheese, butter, wheat, rice or
feed grains. Beginning on the 181st day
and ending on the date of sale under the
CCC contract to which it is applied, the
redemption value of a certificate will be
reduced at the rate of one percent per
day, unless, upon application of the
holder of the certificate, the General
Sales Manager for good cause shown,
specifies a later date for inception of the
reduction in value.

§ 1485.222 Sales of eligible commodi¬
ties for dairy products export pay¬
ment certificates.

(a) Sales of milk, Cheddar cheese,
butter, wheat, rice or feed grains for
dairy products export payment certifi¬
cates will be made pursuant to the terms
and conditions of the announcements
and program regulations sited in § 1485.-
220 and the provisions of this subpart.

(b) If certificates having a value in
excess of the purchase price are sur¬
rendered by the purchaser to CCC, the
certificates having the earliest date of is¬
suance shall be applied first to the pur¬
chase and any certificates not applied
shall be returned to the purchaser. If
the value of certificates applied to the
purchase exceeds the purchase price,
such excess will be adjusted by issuance
and delivery to the purchaser of a dairy
products export payment certificate for
the balance which may be used on a
subsequent purchase from CCC. The
date of issuance shown on the balance
certificate will be the date shown on the
original certificate, or if more than one
certificate is applied to the purchase, the
date of issuance shown on the balance
certificate will be the latest date of issu¬
ance shown on a certificate applied to
the purchase. The face value of the bal¬
ance certificate will be determined by
deducting from the total face value of the
certificates surrendered to CCC, the pur¬
chase price of the commodity and any
discount applicable to the portion of the
certificates being applied to the purchase
as provided in § 1485.221.

Miscellaneous Provisions

§ 1485.225 Covenant against contingent
fees.

The exporter warrants that no person
or selling agency has been employed or
retained to solicit or secure agreements
as provided under § 1485.207 upon an
agreement or understanding for a com¬
mission, percentage, brokerage, or con¬
tingent fee, excepting bona fide em¬
ployees or bona fide established commer¬
cial agencies maintained by the exporter
for the purpose of securing business. For
breach or violation of this warranty, CCC
shall have the right to annul the agree¬

ment without liability, or in its discre¬
tion, to deduct from the value which a
certificate would otherwise have, the full
amount of such commission, percentage,
brokerage, or contingent fee, or to other¬
wise recover such full amount from the
exporter.

§ 1485.226 Performance guarantee.

CCC reserves the right to require the
exporter to furnish a cash deposit, per¬
formance bond, or irrevocable commer¬
cial letter of credit, acceptable to CCC,
to guarantee performance of any of his
obligations under this subpart.

§ 1485.227 Good faith.

If the Vice President, CCC, after af¬
fording the exporter an opportunity to
present evidence determines that such
exporter has not acted in good faith in
connection with any transaction under
this subpart, such exporter may be sus¬
pended from participation in this pro¬
gram for such period as the General
Sales Manager may determine and may
be denied the right to receive certificates
under this subpart in connection with
any transaction previously made under
this program. Any such action shall not
affect any other right of the Department
of Agriculture or the Government.

§ 1485.228 Assignments.

No exporter shall assign any right to
any export payment under this subpart,
except that certificates received by him
may be transferred by endorsement as
provided in § 1485.220.

§ 1485.229 Records and accounts.

Each exporter shall maintain accurate
records showing all commodities exported
or to be exported in connection with this
program. Such records, accounts and
other documents relating to any trans¬
action in connection with this program
shall be available during regular busi¬
ness hours for inspection and audit by
authorized employees of the United
States Department of Agriculture, aim
shall be preserved for three years after
date of export.

§ 1485.230 Reports.

The exporter shall file such reports as
may be required from time to time by t
CCC subject to the approval of the d -
reau of the Budget.

\ 1485.231 ASCS Commodity offices.

(a) Information concerning this

:ram may be obtained from re P re ^
itives of the General Sales ' tte

(1) Joseph Reidinger, 80 Lafay
Street, New York, New York, l°£ld.

(2) Callan B. Duffy, Balboa Buildup

.93 Market Street, San Francisco
California. . nr0 .

(b) Information concerning ddar

:ram or the purchase of milk, ' 0
heese or butter with dairy P roclll h ob .
>ort payment certificates may -

ained from the Minneapolis ASC pnU e,
nodity Office, 6400 France av
S outh, Minneapolis, Minnesota, o

Commodity

FEDERAL REGISTER

11671

Friday , November 1, 1963

Office, 8930 Ward Parkway (P.O. Box
205), Kansas City, Missouri, 64141.

(d) Information concerning the pur¬
chase of feed grains and wheat may be
obtained from the following offices:

(1) Evanston ASCS Commodity Office,
201 Howard Street, Evanston, Illinois,
60202.

(2) Kansas City ASCS Commodity
Office, 8930 Ward Parkway (P.O. Box
205), Kansas City, Missouri, 64141.

(3) Minneapolis ASCS Branch Office,
310 Grain Exchange Building, Minne¬
apolis, Minnesota, 55415.

§ 1485.232 Officials not to benefit.

No member or delegate to Congress,
or resident Commissioner, shall be ad¬
mitted to any benefit that may arise from
any provision of this program, but this
provision shall not be construed to ex¬
tend to a payment made to a corpora¬
tion for its general benefit.

§ 1485.233 Amendment and termina¬
tion.

This program may be amended or
terminated by filing of such amendment
or termination with the Office of the Fed¬
eral Register for publication. Any such
amendment or termination shall not be
applicable to contracts made prior to the
time such amendment or termination be¬
comes effective.

§ 1485.234 Setoff.

If the exporter is indebted to CCC, the
amount of such indebtedness may be set
off against payments due the exporter
under an Application for Dairy Products
Export Payment, Form CCC-135. Set¬
off as provided herein shall not deprive
the exporter of any right he might other¬
wise have to contest the justness of the
indebtedness involved in the setoff action
either by administrative appeal or by
legal action.

desig-

Definitions

§ 1485.240 Eligible country or
nated country.

“Eligible country” or “designated
c ?^ tr y” means any destination outside
oi the United States and Puerto Rico ex-
ciuding any country or area for which
« license is required under regulations
sued by the Bureau of International
ograms, u.S. Department of Com-
t f ce * a license for shipment or

nsshipment thereto has been obtained
Ir °m such Bureau.

§ 1485.241 Export and exportation.

exrS? 0rt ” and “exportation” means,
» as hereinafter provided, a ship-
destin : Continental United States
AhKVoTT 0 an °ther area excluding
Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. The
to hL P Q £ duct so shi PPed shall be deemed
apnea vc en ex P° r ted on the date which
vessel ov 0I \ applicable on-board
toent ann! rt - bi11 of ladin £ or other docu-
fu rnisheH h f ri ? ed ^ this sub Part to be
or if lleu of such bil1 of lading,

ttnited^o? 161 ^ from the Continental
the shinnfi!? l \ hy truck or rail > the date
toms. Tf clears United States Cus-
s Wed nv 5 dairy Product is lost, de¬
board an an l aged after loading on-
be deemed ? P u ship » exportation shall
ed to have been made as of the

date of the on-board ship ocean bill of
lading or other document authorized by
this subpart to be furnished in lieu of
such bill of lading, or the latest date ap¬
pearing on the loading tally sheet or
similar documents if the loss, destruc¬
tion, or damage occurs subsequent to
loading aboard ship but prior to issu¬
ance of on-board ship ocean bill of lading
or such other document: Provided , That
if the “lost” or “damaged” dairy prod¬
uct remains in the United States, it shall
be considered as reentered dairy prod¬
uct and shall be subject to the provisions
of § 1485.209(e).

§ 1485.242 Exporter.

“Exporter” means an individual, cor¬
poration, partnership, association, or
other business entity, which is regularly
engaged in the business of buying and
selling dairy products and for this pur¬
pose maintains a bona fide business office
in the Continental United States and
therein has a person, principal or resi¬
dent agent upon whom service of proc¬
ess may be had.

§ 1485.243 Milk or nonfat dry milk.

“Milk” or “nonfat dry milk” means
either conventional U.S. Extra grade
spray process nonfat dry milk; U.S.
Extra grade “instant nonfat dry milk”
or “low lactose nonfat dry milk” (evi¬
denced by USD A inspection certificates
issued not earlier than 90 days prior to
the date of export) produced and proc¬
essed in the United States.

§ 1485.244 Butter.

“Butter” means U.S. Grade A or better
butter (evidenced by USDA inspection
certificates issued not earlier than 90
days prior to the date of export) pro¬
duced and processed in the United
States.

§ 1485.245 Milkfat products.

“Milkfat products” include the prod¬
ucts commonly known as butteroil, an¬
hydrous milkfat, plastic cream, ghee, and
any other product containing a minimum
of 75 percent of milkfat. The milkfat
in “milkfat products” shall be of a quality
comparable to the quality of U.S. Grade
A butter or better.

§ 1485.246 Foreign buyer.

“Foreign buyer” means the buyer (a)
who is named in a Notice of Sale reg¬
istered in accordance with § 1485.206 as
having a contract of sale with the ex¬
porter, and (b) who is the importer to
the eligible country. Such foreign buyer
must be a legal entity separate from the
exporter, but may, however, be a foreign
affiliate of the exporter. If the sale is
made by the exporter with an agent or
broker of the foreign buyer, the contract
of sale must be in the name of the foreign
buyer.

§ 1485.247 Dale of sale.

“Date of sale,” as used in this subpart
and in certificates, as applied to con¬
tracts of purchase of dairy products
from Commodity Credit Corporation
means the date of the contract as defined
in sales announcements, LD-33 and
LD-35.

Effective date: This Dairy Products
Export Payment-In-Kind Program (SM-
7), Terms and Conditions shall become
effective on the date of publication in the
Federal Register.

The reporting and record-keeping re¬
quirements contained herein have been
approved by the Bureau of the Budget
in accordance with the Federal Reports
Act of 1942.

Issued this 28th day of October 1963.

Raymond A. Ioanes,

Vice P r e s id ent, Commodity
Credit Corporation , Admin¬
istrator, Foreign Agricultural
Service.

Notice to Exporters

The Department of Commerce, Bureau
of International Programs (the Bureau of
Foreign Commerce until August 9, 1961),
pursuant to regulations under the Export
Control Act of 1949, prohibits the exportation
or re-exportation by anyone of any commodi¬
ties (except absorbent cotton and sterilized
gauze and bandages with respect to Cuba
only) under this program to Cuba, the Soviet
Bloc, or Communist-controlled area of the
Far East including Communist China, North
Korea, and the Communist-controlled area
of Vietnam, except under validated license
issued by the U.S. Department of Commerce,
Bureau of International Programs.

These regulations generally require that
exporters, in or in connection with their
contracts with foreign purchasers, where the
contract involves $10,000 or more and ex¬
portation is to be made to a Group R country,
obtain from the foreign purchaser a written
acknowledgment of his understanding of
(1) U.S. Commerce Department prohibitions
(Comprehensive Export Schedule, §§371.4
and 371.8) against sales or resale for re¬
export of said commodities, or any part
thereof, without express Commerce Depart¬
ment authorization, to the Soviet Bloc,
Communist China, North Korea or the Com¬
munist-controlled area of Vietnam or to
Cuba, and (2) the sanction of denial of
future U.S. export privileges that may be
imposed for violation of the Commerce De¬
partment regulations. Exporters who have
a continuing and regular relationship with
a foreign purchaser may obtain a blanket
acknowledgment from such purchaser cov¬
ering all transactions involving surplus agri¬
cultural commodities and manufactures
thereof purchased from CCC or subsidized
for export by the Secretary of Agriculture or
CCC. Where commodities are to be exported
by a party other than the original purchaser
of the commodities from the CCC the original
purchaser should inform the exporter in
writing of the requirements for obtaining
the signed acknowledgment from the foreign
purchaser.

For all exportations, one of the destination
control statements specified in Commerce
Department Regulations (Comprehensive Ex¬
port Schedule § 379.10(c)) is required to be
placed on all copies of the shipper’s export
declaration, all copies of the bill of lading,
and all copies of the commercial invoices.
For additional information as to which desti¬
nation control statement to use, the exporter
should communicate with the Bureau of In¬
ternational Programs or one of the field
offices of the Department of Commerce.

Exporters should consult the applicable
Commerce Department regulations for more
detailed information if desired and for any
changes that may be made therein.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11585; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;

8:48 a.m.]

11672

RULES AND REGULATIONS

Title 14—AERONAUTICS AND SPACE

Chapter I—Federal Aviation Agency

SUBCHAPTER F—AIR TRAFFIC AND GENERAL OPERATING RULES [NEW]

[Reg. Docket No. 2014; Amdt. 345]

PART 97—STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES ENEW1

Miscellaneous Amendments

The amendments to the standard instrument approach procedures contained herein are adopted to become effective
when indicated in order to promote safety. The amended procedures supersede the existing procedures of the same classifl-
cation now in effect for the airports specified therein. For the convenience of the users, the complete procedure is republished

111 th j£ ^^^onVS^whteh^em^^i^^iate'actton ^thetaterests of safety in air commerce, I find that compliance
with the notice and procedure provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act is impracticable and that good cause exists for

making this amendment effective within less than 30 days from publication. AHminiqtrntnr m pR 5662) Part 97 [New]
In view of the foregoing and pursuant to the authority dele gated to me by the Administrator (24 * .R. &bt> 2 ), Fait y / UNewj

(14 CFR Part 97 [New]) is amended as follows: .. , .

1. By amending the following automatic direction finding procedures prescribed in § 97.11(b) to lead.

ADF Standard Instrument Approach Procedure

Bearings headings, courses and radials are magnetic. Elevations and altitudes are In feet MSB. Ceilings are in feet above airport elevation. Distances are in nautical

Transition

From—

To—

Course and
distance

Minimum

altitude

(feet)

Ceiling and visibility minimums

Condition

2-engine or less

65 knots
or less

More than
65 knots

T-d.

300-1

T-n.

500-1^

500-1M

C-d.

1000-1M

C-n_

1000-2

S-d-5.

800-1H

S-n-5.

800-2

A-dn.

1000-2

More than
2-engine,
more than
65 knots

306-1

500-134

looo-itf

1000-2

800-1)4

800-2

1000-2

Procedure turn N side of ers, 230° Outbnd, 050° Inbnd, 2500' within 5 miles of Munford Int* (nonstandard due obstruction).

Minimum altitude over Munford Int on final approach ers 2000'.

I^visusd con^^n^establiiheVupon descent ^authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 5.0 miles after passing Munford Int, or 0 mile after
passing ANB-RBn, climb immediately to 4000' eastbound on R-082 of ANB-VOR within 20 miles.

No™'°Tk§pr C SraS&TonlyTo? VOR g m“in addition to an operating ADF receiver and Munford Int* is identified.

•Munford Int: Int ANB-VOR R-lll and bearing 230° from ANB RBn.

City, Anniston; State, Ala.; Airport Name, Anniston Municipal; Elev., 611'; Fjhz. Class BMHj Ident., ANB; Procedure No. 1, Amdt. 1; Eff. Date, 9 Nov

No. Orig.; Dated, 17 Oct. I

LOM __

Direct.

1800

T-dn.

300-1

LOM

Direct...

1500

C-dn.

500-1

LOM

Direct._.

1600

S-dn-13.

400-1

A-dn.

800-2

Woodvillc Int.
BTR VOR-—
Morganza Int.

300-1

500-1

400-1

800-2

206-J4

500-ltt

406-1

800-2

i ers of

Procedure turn W side of N W ers, 307° Outbnd, 127° Inbnd, 1300' within 10 miles.
Minimum altitude over facility on final approach ers, 1300'.

Crs and distance, facility to airport, 127°—3.8 miles.

If'visual contact noTestabi^ to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 3.8 miles after passing LOM, climb to i

127° within 20 miles.

Note: Approach lights not installed. o-Dated,

City, Baton Rouge; State, La.; Airport Name, Ryan; Elev., 70'; Fac. Class., LOMJtdent., BT; Procedure No. 1, Amdt. 10; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 03; Sup. Amd •

Park City FM.

BIL-VOR.

BlL-RBn.....

Musselshell Int-

Ryegate Int..

Rapelje DME Int#.

LOM

Direct__

5300

T-dn*.

300-1

500-1

800-2

LOM

Direct_

5300

C-dn.

**500-1

I.OM _

Direct.

5300

S-dn-9**.

500-1

LOM

Direct_

6000

A-dn.

800-2

LOM ..-

Direct.

5300

LOM.

Direct.

5300

206-J4

500 - 1)4

5C0-1

800-2

Procedure turn S side of crs, 275° Outbnd, 095° Inbnd, 5300' within 10 miles.

Minimum altitude over facility on final approach crs, 4800'. ;

If "visual confactnotestabHslmd^upon'desrerit to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 4.0 miles after passing LOM, climb to 5700 oo
095° from BI LOM within 15 miles or, when directed by ATC, climb to 5300' on R-055 BIL-VOR within 20 miles.

Caution: 4249' tower 3.0 miles SE of airport.

Other change: Deletes transition from Lavina FM.

•Takeoff below 300-1 net authorized on Runways 4-22 and 16-34.

**400-1 authorized after passing R-005 BIL-VOR.

#Rapelje DME Int: Billings VOR R-284 and 25-mile DME Fix.

City, Billings; State, Mont.; Airport Name, Logan Field; Elev., 3606'; Fac. Class., LOM; Ident., BI; Procedure No. 1, Amdt. 5; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63;

8 Sept. 62

bearing

3; Sup. Amdt. No. 4;

• Dated*

Friday, November 1, 1963

FEDERAL REGISTER

11673

ADF Standard Instrument Approach Procedure— Continued

Transition

Ceiling and visibility minimums

From—

To-

Course and
distance

Minimum

altitude

(feet)

Condition

2-engine or less

More than
2-engine,
more than

65 knots

65 knots
or less

More than
65 knots

Black Forest VHF Int. ____

CO LOM.

Direct.

8200

7300

T-dn* _

300-1

600-1

400-1

800-2

300-1

600-1

400-1

800-2

200-^

600-1M

400-1

800-2

COS VOR _—_---__

CO LOM.

Direct__

C-dn..

Hanover Int -• ••-•r-*—,_

CO LOM.

Direct..

S—dn—35

Pinnn Tnf ________ ,_......

Security Int, __

Direct _

A-dn..

CorfMiritv Tnl __

CO LOM...

Direct.

Radar vectoring authorized in accordance with approved patterns.

Procedure turn E side of crs, 166° Outbnd, 346° Inbnd, 7300' within 10 miles
Minimum altitude over facility on Anal approach crs, 7300'.

Crs and distance, facility to airport, 346°—3.7 miles.

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 3.7 miles after passing CO LOM, make right climbing
turn to 8000' on crs 080° within 20 miles or, when directed by ATC, make right climbing turn, climb to 8000' on R-075 PEF-VOR within 20 miles.

Caution: Sharply rising terrain W of airport. 7190' tower 8 miles N of airport; 7923' tower 14 miles N of airport.

Other change: Deletes transition from Fountain FM.

•400-1 required for takeoff Runways 30 and 35 except when monitored by departure radar.

City, Colorado Springs; State, Colo.; Airport Name, Peterson Field; Elev., 6172'; Fac. Class., MHW; Ident., CO; Procedure No. 1, Arndt. 11; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63; Sup. Arndt.

No. 10; Dated, 2 Feb. 63

Bay Int ..

Fremont RBn_

Direct _ __ _

2500

T-d

300-1

Lindsey Tnt ______ ______

Fremont RBn_

Direct_

2500

C-d.

1000-1

Attica VOR

Fremont RBn..__

Direct.

2500

A-dn..

Procedure turn E side of crs, 200° Outbnd, 020° Inbnd, 250 0' within 10 miles.

Minimum altitude over facility on final approach crs, 1700'.

Facility on airport.

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 0.0 mile of Fremont RBn, turn left, climb to 2500' on
crs 200° within 10 miles. Hold S W of Fremont RBn, right turns, 1-minute, 020° Inbnd.

Caution: Towers 910' 4 miles E of airport.

Note: Absolute MRA for communications with Findlay FSS, 1350 7 .

City, Fremont; State, Ohio; Airport Name, Fremont; Elev., 650'; Fac. Class., MHW; Ident., FRO; Procedure No. 1, Arndt. Orig.; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63, or upon commissioning

of facility

T-dn.

300-1

200-H

C-d.

400-1

500-1

600-m

C-n.

400-1M

500-1^

500-1H

S-dn-13__.

400-1

A-dn.

800-2

•—_

Procedure turn N side of crs, 310° Outbnd, 130° Inbnd. 2500' within 10 miles.

Minimum altitude over facility on final approach 2100.

^rs and distance, facility to airport, 130°—3.8 miles.

h visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 3.8 miles after passing LOM, climb to 2800' on 130°
™ proceed to Granby Int or, when directed by ATC, make left turn, climbing to 2500' and proceed to LOM.
wote: Approach from holding pattern not authorized. Procedure turn required.

Uution: 2049' tower 11 miles WNW of airport.

City, Joplin; State, Mo.; Airport Name, Joplin Municipal; Elev., 980'; Fac. Class., LOM; Ident., JL; Procedure No. 1, Arndt. 8; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63; Sup. Amdt. No. 7; Dated,

23 Mar. 63

Argyle Int...
Alexandria Int
Galland Int
McCall Int * "

EOK RBn....

Direct__

2300

T-dn.

300-1

EOK RBn.

Direct_

2300

C-dn_

500-1

EOK RBn.

Direct_

2300

A-dn.

EOK RBn________

Direct.

2300

ffS Urc turn W side of crs, 305° Outbnd, 125° Inbnd, 2300' within 10 miles.

FjSm Ura al M tu(le °ver facility on final approach crs, 1200'.

jBJjhty on airport.

withinnot established upon descent to authorized landing minimums of if landing not accomplished within 0.0 mile of EOK RBn, climb to 2300' on crs of 125°
m 10 mi ks and return to E OK RBn.

ity ’ Keokuk ; State, Iowa; Airport Name, Keokuk Municipal; Elev., 671'; Fac. Class., MHW; Ident., EOK; Procedure No. 1, Amdt. 1; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63; Sup. Amdt. No

Orig.; Dated, 26 Jan. 63

PROCEDURE CANCELLED, EFFECTIVE 9 NOVEMBER 1963.

1 J. Wayette; State, La.; Airport Name, Lafayette; Elev., 43'; Fac. Class., BMH; Ident., LFT; Procedure No. 1, Amdt. 2; Eff. Date, 16 July 60; Sup. Amdt. No. 1; Dated,

22 Nov. 58

CQQ-VOR

^O^^^^dOG^VOR

LOM.

Direct_ _

1900

T-dn_

300-1

LOM.

Direct_

1900

C-dn__.

400-1

500-1

S— dn-13_ _______ _

400-1

LOM.

Direct.

1900

200

500-1H
400-1

Minimum , Blue OI crs > 306 Outbnd, 126° Inbnd, 1900 7 within 10 miles.

Crs and distan^foS facUi * y on 61131 approach crs, 1800'.
d H visual eont^f ’ fa . clll * y to airport, 126°—5.5 miles.

Qgg-vop™ esta blished upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 5.5 miles after passing QQ LOM, climb to 1900' on

Caution- fijl/t. 20 miles *

City i 0n . tower 5 miles N W of airport, 870' tower 9 miles WSW of airport.

S'lew ( State, Tex.; Airport Name, Gregg County Municipal; Elev., 365'; Fac. Class., LOM; Ident., GG; Procedure No. 1, Amdt. 1; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63; Sup. Amdt

No. Orig.; Dated, 2 Dec. 61

11674

RULES AND REGULATIONS

ADF Standard Instrument Approach Procedure—C ontinued

Transition

From—

To—

Course and
distance

Minimum

altitude

(feet)

Condition

2-engine or less

More than
2-engine,
more than

65 knots

65 knots
or less

More than
65 knots

Lufkin VOR .

LFK-RBn.

Direct.

1600

T-dn.

300-1

*300-1

C-dn..

600-1

*600-1H

A-dn.

800-2

*800-2

Ceiling and visibility minimums

Procedure turn S side of crs, 296° Outbnd, 116° Inbnd, 1500' within 10 miles.

Minimum altitude over facility on final approach crs, 900'.

If l visual°contac?iiot established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 0.0 mile of LFK RPn, climb to 2000' on crs of 116° with-

Cai tion: Radio tower 648' located 3 miles SW of airport. Radio tower 658' 3 miles ENE of airport.

♦Heavier aircraft use caution due runway load bearing ability.

Citv Lufkin 1 State, Tex.; Airport Name, Angelina County; Elev., 290'; Fac. Class., BMII; Ident., LFK; Procedure No. 1, Arndt. 7; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63; Sup. Amdt. No. 6;

Dated, 12 May 62

Oakville Int....
Bruins RBn—

Waverly Int_

Cuba Int.

Miller Int_

Memphis V OR.

LOM .

Direct_

1900

T-dn%.

300-1

LOM ..

Direct.

1800

C-dn.

500-1

LOM (final)

Direct_

1700

S-dn-9.

400-1

LOM __

Direct.

1800

A-dn.

800-2

LOM .

Direct.

1900

LOM___-.

Direct.

1900

200-K

500-1H
400-1
800-2

Radar vectoring authorized in accordance with approved patterns.

Procedure turn S side W crs, 267° Outbnd, 087° Inbnd, 1800' within 10 miles.

Minimum altitude over facility on final approach crs, 1700'.

Hvisual ^n tact not 1 est^b?ished°upon^d cscen t°to^authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 4.3 miles after passing ME LOM, climb to 1900'
on crs 087° within 15 miles or, when directed by ATC, turn right, climb to 1900' on R-135 MEM-VOR within 15 miles.

%Air Carrier Note: Takeoff with less than 200-H not authorized on Runway 14-32.

City, Memphis; State, Tenn.; Airport Name, Memphis Municipal; Elev., 331'; Fac. Class., LOM; Ident., ME; Procedure No. 1, Amdt. 10; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63; Sup. Amdt.
J No. 9; Dated, 22 June 63

MEM VOR..

Miller Int_

Lewisburg Int.

Savage Int-

Norfolk Int....

Walls Int.

Porter Int.

LOM

Direct. ..

1900

T-dn.

300-1

LOM

Direct. ..

1900

C-dn.

500-1

LOM (final) ..

Direct..

1600

S-dn-35..

400-1

LOM (final) ..

Direct. ..

1600

A-dn.

800-2

1,0m _ ..

Direct.

1900

LOM

Direct. ..

1900

LOM....

Direct.

1900

200-tf

600-1}*

400-1

800-2

Radar vectoring authorized in accordance with approved patterns.

Procedure turn E side of crs, 174° Outbnd, 354° Inbnd, 1900' within 10 miles.

Minimum altitude over facility on final approach crs, 1600'.

Hvisual contact"no t^st^lShe^upon descent ^authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 4.7 miles after passing TS LOM, climb to 2500 on crs
of 354° within 15 miles or, when directed by ATC, climb to 1900', turn left and return direct to LOM.

City, Memphis; State, Tenn.; Airport Name, Memphis Municipal; Elev., 331'; Fac. Class., LOM; Ident., TS; Procedure No. 2, Amdt. Orig.; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63

Snelling Int*.
Stomar Int**

I.OM .

Direct.

2000

T-dn.

300-1

LOM

Direct.

2000

C-dn.

500-1

A-dn.

200 - 1 *

500-1}*

Radar vectoring authorized in accordance with approved patterns. . .. , _

Procedure turn E side of crs, 000° Outbnd, 180° Inbnd, 2000' within 10 miles. Nonstandard to provide separation from Castle AFB traffic.

Minimum altitude over facility on final approach crs, 1100'.

Hvisual c^Ta^ descent 9 ^authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 1.9 miles after passing ME LOM, climb to -000 on

180 *^nelling°Int: Int 000° bearing from ME LOM and LIN VOR R-123.

**Stomar Int: Int 263° bearing from ME LOM and SCK VOR R-147. o ]

Citv Merced* State, Calif.; Airport Name, Merced Municipal; Elev., 155'; Fac. Class., LOM; Ident., ME; Procedure No. 1, Amdt. Orig.; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63, or i I
* * missioning of facility

Q atu l,, TTrknlr VHR Tnt

ID OM/RBn (final).

Direct.

1000

T-dn.

300-1

oulKiy hook, v xir nit---

C-dn...

S-dn-4R, 4L____
A-dn.

500-1

800-2

300-1

500-1

800-2

200 -}*

500-1}*

500-1

800-2

Radar vectoring authorized in accordance with approved patterns. .

Procedure turn S side of crs 223° Outbnd, 043° Inbnd, 1200' within 10 miles of OM/RBn.

Minimum altitude over facility on final approach crs, 700'. . ..

Crs and distance, facility to Runway 4R, 043°— 2.7 miles; to Runway 4L, 032°—2.8 miles. . nivr /RPn make right

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 2^ to idle wild (I") l0 ‘

turn to 3000' on IDL VOR R-078 to DPK VOR. Hold E, 1-minute left turns, Inbnd crs 258° or, when directed by ATC, climb on crs 043 to 1900 to laicwi
hold NE, 1-minute left turns, Inbnd crs 223°. A

Caution: Circling landing minimums do not provide standard clearance over stack 277 1.1 miles SSE of Runway 4K.

City New York; State, N.Y.; Airport Name, International; Elev., 12'; Fac. Class., MHW; Ident., ID; Procedure No. 1, Amdt. 21; Eff. Date, 9 Nov,

Dated, 2 Mar. 63

63; Sup. Amdt. No. 20-

Friday, November 1, 1963

FEDERAL REGISTER

11675

ADF Standard Instrument Approach Procedure —Continued

Transition

Ceiling and visibility minimums

From—

To—

Course and
distance

Minimum

altitude

(feet)

Condition

2-engine or less

More than
2-engine,
more than

65 knots

65 knots
or less

More than
65 knots

Idlewild V<">R

LOM......

Direct__

1900

2000

1700

T-dn

300-1

500-1

800-2

300-1

500-1

800-2

200-1,$

500-114

500-1

800-2

Park VOR _ __

Roslyn Int*...

Via LGA VOR
R-101.

Direct.

C-dn

Rnslyn Tnt.* ___

LOM (final).

S-dn-22L_

A-dn_

Radar vectoring authorized in accordance with approved patterns.

Procedure turn E side NE crs, 043° Outbnd, 223° Inbnd, 1900' within 10 miles of IW/LOM (nonstandard to avoid LaGuardia traffic).

Minimum altitude over facility on final approach crs, 1700'.

Crs and distance, facility to airport, 223°—5.6 miles.

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 5.6 miles after passing IW/LOM, make left climbing
turn to 2000' on IDL VOR R-190 to Sandy Hook Int. Hold S, 1-minute right turns, Inbnd crs 010° or, when directed by ATC, climb on crs 223° to 1500' to IDL (ID) OM/
RBn. Hold SW, 1-minute right turns, Inbnd crs 043°.

Caution: Circling minimums do not provide clearance over 277' stack 1.1 miles SSE of Runway 4R.

‘Roslyn Int: Int LGA-VOR R-101 and 043° bearing from Idlewild (IW) LOM.

City, New York; State, N.Y.; Airport Name, International; Elev., 12'; Fac. Class., LOM; Ident., IW; Procedure No. 2, Arndt. 3; Efl. Date, 9 Nov. 63; Sup. Arndt. No. 2;

Dated., 2 Mar. 63

Waterville Int...
UCA VOR_

UTI RBn.

UTI RBn (final)

Direct

T-dn.

300-1

200-M

C-d .

700-1

700-1)4

C-n.

700-2

S-d-33.

700-1

S—n—33_

700-2

A-dn..

800-2

The following minimums apply if Utica OM received:

C-dh*.1

400-1 1

500-1 1

500-1)4

S-dn-33*_

400-1

Radar vectoring utilizing Griffiss RAPC ON authorized in accordance with approved patterns.

Procedure turn E side of crs, 149° Outbnd, 329° Inbnd, 3200' within 10 miles of UTI RBn.

Minimum altitude over facility on final appioach crs, 3100'.

Crs and distance, facility to airport, 329°—7.3 miles; Utica OM to airport, 329°—3.8 miles.

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 7.3 miles after passing UTI RBn or 3.8 miles after
passing l tica OM, make climbing left turn to 3200', return direct to UTI RBn. Hold SE of UTI RBn, 329° Inbnd, right turns, 1-minute.

Dual ADF equipment required. Do not descend below 1440' until after passing Utica OM (radar fix may be substituted for Utica OM).

City, Utica; State, N.Y.; Airport Name, Oneida County; Elev., 742'; Fac. Class., MHW; Ident., UTI; Procedure No. 1, Arndt. 3; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63; Sup. Arndt. No. 2;

Dated, 27 July 63

2. By amending the following very high frequency omnirange (VOR) procedures prescribed in § 97.11(c) to read:

VOR Standard Instrument Approach Procedure

headings, courses and radials are magnetic. Elevations and altitudes are in feet MSL. Ceilings are in feet above airport elevation. Distances are in nautical
nules unless otherwise indicated, except visibilities which are in statute miles.

nT1 i.ti an Instrument approach procedure of the above type is conducted at the below named airport, it shall be in accordance with the following instrument approach procedure,
otuess an approach is conducted in accordance with a different procedure for such airport authorized by the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Agency. Initial approaches
11 De ma(le over specified routes. Minimum altitudes shall correspond with those established for en route operation in the particular area or as set forth below.

Transition

Ceiling and visibility minimums

From—

To—

Course and
distance

Minimum

altitude

(feet)

Condition

2-engine or less

More than
2-engine,
more than
65 knots

65 knots
or less

More than
65 knots

T-dn..

300-1

200-)$

C-d.

800-1

800-1)$

C-n....

800-2

S-dn-4.

800-1

A-dn.

800-2

to 1900'

- --^ on anai approacn crs, low .

“j™®, facility to airport, 065°—7.6 miles.

established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 7.6 miles after passing BTR-VOR, turn left and climb

yQQ/ p f\A aavtv votauuoiiuu

Other ohi-moL20 miles or, when directed by ATC, turn right, climb to 2000' on R-081.
aer change: Deletes transition from Baton Rouge LFk.

7, Baton Rouge; State, La.; Airport

Name, Ryan; Elev., 70'; Fac. Class., BVOR; Ident., BTR; Procedure No. 1, Arndt. 5; Efl. Date, 9 Nov. 63; Sup. Arndt. No. 4; Dated,

28 Dec. 57

Bjrowan Int.
oanunit int..

J^ihimum altitnriA« de °! c ^ s » 348 Outbnd, 168° Inbnd, 8000' within 10 miles. Beyond 10 miles not authorized due to high terrain.

Crs and diSSSf-iSS fa . cib ^ on final approach crs, 7300’.

* b visual contacLnnt^ C1 ^kv° aur P° rt > 1770 —1-9 miles.

climb to 8000 * JKoW upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 4.0 miles after passing CDC-VOR, make right cli nbing
Caution- 25K. JH 11 : 34 ? Wlthi n 10 miles of CDC-VOR, all turns W.

•600-2 reqS p" a “ 2 8 of airport.

City, Cedar c Unway 18 all aircraft. Takeoff not authorized Runway 8.

r rty; State, Utah; Airport Name, Cedar City Municipal; Elev., 6622'; Fac. Class., BVOR; Ident., CDC; Procedure No. 1, Arndt. 2; Eff. Date,9 Nov. 63; Sup.

Arndt. No. 1; Dated, 27 Apr. 63

Summit Int..
CDC VOR.

Direct-

Direct.

11,500

7300

T-dn*__.

C-dn_

S-dn-18..
A-dn-

300-1

700-1

400-1

800-2

200-IS
700-1J4
400-1
800-2

11676

RULES AND REGULATIONS

VOR Standard Instrument Approach Procedure —Continued

Transition

Ceiling and visibility minimums

From—

To-

Course and
distance

Minimum

altitude

(feet)

Condition

2-engine or less

More than
■ 2-engine,
more than
65 knots

65 knots
or less

More than
65 knots

fill

1 l l l

1 1 • 1
lilt

1 1 1 l

till
114 1

l 1 1 l

i is? :

777'?

300-1

700-1

800-2

300-1

700-1

800-2

206-14
700-1H
700-1H
806-2

Procedure turn N side of crs, 078° Outbnd, 258° Inbnd, 2000' within 10 miles.

Minimum altitude over facility on final approach crs, 2000'.

Crs and distance, facility to airport, 258°—5.6 miles.

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 5.6 miles after passing STX-VOR, climb to 2000'
on R-258 within 20 miles of STX-VOR.

City, Christiansted; State, St. Croix, Virgin Islands; Airport Name, Alexander Hamilton; Elev., 57'; Fac. Class., BVOR; Ident., STX; Procedure No. 1, Arndt. 1; Eff. Date,

9 Nov. 63; Sup. Arndt. No. Orig.; Dated, 25 July 59

Goodsprings Int

LAS-VOR.

Direct_

7000

T-dn

300-1

200-14

600-114

Las Vegas RBn_

LAS-VOR_____

Direct__

5100

C-dn

600-1

Las Vegas RBn

LAS-VOR (final)_

Direct_

*2800

A-dn_

800-2

Kids Int .

LAS-VOR__

Direct_

5100

Charleston Int

LAS-VOR.

Direct..

5100

Procedure turn E side of crs, 013° Outbnd, 193° Inbnd, 5100’ within 15 miles (within 5 miles LAS RBn).

Minimum altitude over LAS RBn on final approach crs, *4600’; over VOR on final approach crs 2800’.

Facility at airport.

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 0.0 mile, turn left, climb to 6000’ on R-065 within 15
miles or, when directed by ATC, climb to 6000' on R-210 within 10 miles. All turns S of crs.

Caution: 4054' terrain 4 miles SE of RBn.

Other changes: Deletes transitions from Erie Int, Boulder City Int and Jean Int.

♦Descent below 4600' authorized only if position over RBn positively determined Inbnd on final approach.

City. Las Vegas; State, Nev.; Airport Name, McCarran; Elev., 2171'; Fac. Class.. BVORTAC; Ident., LAS; Procedure No. 1, Arndt. 14; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63; Sup. Arndt. No.

13; Dated, 30 June 62

Marshall VOR ..

Tatum Int_

ASL R-222..

1900

T-dn.

300-1

200-14

Int GGG R-083 and ALS R-222 _

Tatum Int_

ASL R-222..

1900

C-dn

400-1

500-1

500-1H

Cushing Tyjt

Tatum Int___

ASL R-222..

2100

S-dn-13.

400-1

406-1

Tatum Tnt _ j_

GGG-VOR...

GGG R-125.

1900

A-dn.

800-2

806-2

-—

Procedure turn S side of crs, 305° Outbnd, 125° Inbnd, 1900' within 10 miles.

Minimum altitude over facility on final approach crs, 1100'.

Crs and distance, facility to airport. 125°—2.3 miles.

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 2.3 miles after passing
R-125 from GGG-VOR within 20 miles.

Caution: 644' radio tower 5 miles N W of airport, 870' tower 9 miles WS W of airport. 650 FPM descent required at 120 K.

GGG-VOR, climb to 1900' on

City, Longview; State, Tex.; Airport Name, Gregg County Municipal; Elev., 365'; Fac. Class., BVOR; Ident., GGG; Procedure No. 1, Arndt. 5; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63;Sup.

Arndt. No. 4; Dated. 15 July 61

T-dn—

C-d...

C-d*__

C-n....

C-n*__.

A-dn..

300-1

800-1 y 2

800-114

400-1

500-1

800-2

400-1 Yt

500-114

1000-2

300-1

80 J- 1 H

506-114

806-2

500-2

1000-2

Radar vectoring authorized in accordance with approved patterns.

Procedure turn E side of crs, 150° Outbnd, 330° Inbnd, 2300' within 10 miles.

Minimum altitude over LOU-VOR on final approach crs, 2300'; over FM, 1300'.

Crs and distance, facility to airport, 330°—8.3 miles.

Crs and distance, FM to airport, 330°—1.9 miles. tt ^t> i o milps from

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 8.3 miles after passing LOU-VOR, or l.v
FM. make a climbing right turn as soon as practical and return to LOU-VOR at 2000'. Hold SE right turns, 1-minute 330° Inbnd.

♦Descent authorized if FM is received.

City, Louisville; State, Ky.; Airport Name, Bowman Field; Elev., 549'; Fac. Class., BVORTAC; Ident., LOU; Procedure No. 1, Arndt. 4; Eff. Date ,9 Nov. 63;Sup- Am

No. 3; Dated, 17 Dec. 60

Lufkin RBN

LF'K'-VOR

Direct.

1600

T-dn_

300-1

C-dn__

400-1

S-dn-33_

400-1

A-dn_ _

800-2

•300-1

♦500-1

*400-1

♦800-2

Procedure turn E side of crs, 149° Outbnd, 329° Inbnd, 1300 7 within 10 miles.

Minimum altitude over facility on final approach crs, 1300 7 .

Crs and distance, facility to airport, 329°—4.3 miles. .... ... , T turn left, dl®®

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 4.3 miles after passing L* K-vurv, iu «
to 2000'on R-310 within 10 miles. , , , „ XT1? oirnort

Note: Radio tower 558' 3 miles ENE of airport. 548' radio tower 3 miles SW of airport, 3 miles W of final approach crs, 731' radio tower 4.5 miles NK oi any
♦Heavier aircraft use caution due runway load-bearing ability. 5

City, Lufkin; State, Tex.; Airport Name, Angelina County; Elev., 290'; Fac. Class., BVOR; Ident., LFK; Procedure No. 1, Arndt. 6; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63; Sup. Am

Dated, 12 May 62

Friday, November 1, 1963

FEDERAL REGISTER

11677

VOR Standard Instrument Approach Procedure —Continued

Transition

Celling and visibility minimums

From—

To-

Course and
distance

Minimum

altitude

(feet)

Condition

2-engine or less

More than
2-engine,
more than
65 knots

65 knots
or less

More than
65 knots

OOO-VOR

ASL-VOR___

Direct_

1900

3000

1900

T-dn_

300-1

600-1

400-1

800-2

Shreveport VOR

ASL-VOR_

Direct__

O-dn_

tVOOillft'Vfl Tfit ' _

ASL-VOR_

Direct_

S-dn-34_

Bethany Int

ASL-VOR_

Direct__

A-dn*.-

Procedure turn W side of crs. 134° Outbnd, 314° Inbnd, 1900' within 10 miles.

Minimum altitude over facility on final approach crs, 1500'.

Crs and distance, facility to airport, 314°—5.3 miles.

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 5.3 miles after passing ASL-VOR, climb to 1900' on
R-314 ASL-VOR within 20 miles.

Notes: 1. All pilots using this procedure requested to close IFR flight plan immediately upon completion of approach w ith Gregg County Radio or commercial facilities.
IFR departure clearance and flight plan must be approved and filed with Fort Worth ARTC through Gregg County Radio prior to takeoff or remain VFR. 2. Public
weather service not available.

Caution: 732' radio tower 1.9 miles NW of airport. 520' water tower 1.0 mile N of airport.

‘Alternate authorized only for those carriers having approval of their arrangements for weather and communication service at this airport.

City, Marshall; State, Tex.; Airport Name, Harrison County; Elev., 357'; Fac. Class., BVOR; Ident., ASL; Procedure No. 1, Arndt. 1; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 03; Sup. Arndt. No.

Orig.; Dated, 12 Aug. 61

T-dn*..

300-1

200- 4

C-dn.

500-1

500-14

S-dn-27.

400-1

A-dn.

800-2

Radar vectoring authorized in accordance with approved patterns.

Procedure turn N side of crs, 107° Outbnd, 287° Inbnd, 1900' w ithin 10 miles.

Minimum altitude over facility on final approach crs, 1000'.

Crs and distance, facility to airport, 287°—3.0 miles.

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished w ithin 3.0 miles after passing M EM-VOR, climb to 1800' on
R-287 within 15 miles or, when directed by ATC, turn left and climb to 1900' on R-220 within 15 miles.

•Air Carrier Note: Takeoff at less than 200-4 not authorized on Runway 14-32.

City, Memphis; State, Tenn.; Airport Name, Memphis Municipal; Elev., 331'; Fac. Class., BVORTAC; Ident., MEM; Procedure No. 1; Arndt. 13; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. G3;

Sup. Arndt. No. 12; Dated, 20 Apr. 63

Prescott RBn.
Drake VOR..
Simmons Int.
Perkins Int...

PRC VOR ...

Direct_

7300

T-dn*.

800-2

Simmons Int.-.

228°—13 miles..

8000

C-dn.

800-2

PRC VOR (final). ..

Direct.

6500

A-dn.

1000-2

PRC VOR.....

Direct.

7300

Procedure turn N side of crs, 289° Outbnd, 109° Inbnd, 7300' within 10 miles. Nonstandard due to high terrain S.

Minimum altitude over facility on final approach crs, 6500'.

Crs and distance, facility to airport, 112°—4.0 miles.

hvisualcontactnotestablishedupon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 4.0 miles after passing PRC-VOR, make immediate left
wimbing turn and return to PRC-VOR; continue climb to 8000' on R-289 within 20 miles or, when directed by ATC, make immediate left turn and climb to 9000' on R-080
Within is miles of PRC-VOR. Beyond 15 miles not authorized.

^ote: Final approach course is to NE side of airport.

600-2 authorized for takeoff on Runways 3 and 21.

City, Prescott; State, Ariz.; Airport Name, Prescott Municipal; F.lev., 5042'; Fac. Class., BVORTAC; Ident., PRC; Procedure No. 1, Arndt. 9; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63; Sup.

Arndt. No. 8; Dated, 27 June 63

3. By amending the following terminal very high frequency omnirange (TerVOR) procedures prescribed in § 97.13 to read:

Terminal VOR Standard Instrument Approach Procedure

A ieadingF » courses and radials are magnetic. Elevations and altitudes are in feet MSL. Ceilings are in feet above airport elevation. Distances are in nautical
iuuk uruess ot horwise indicated, except visibilities which are in statute miles.

a lnstrurae ^ approach procedure of the above type is conducted at the below named airport, it shall be in accordance with the following instrument approach procedure,
shall hp I Af I rj I,roac ^ 1 k caQ ducted in accordance with a different procedure for such airport authorized by the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Agency. Initial approaches
e made over specified routes. Minimum altitudes shall correspond with those established for en route operation in the particular area or as set forth below.

Transition

Ceiling and visibility minimums

From—

To—

Jeer Park VOR
Sandy Hook Int.A

Procedure ti.™ g v U -A onze<i 111 accordance with approved patterns.

Minimum *ffS,5 side of crs > 223° Outbnd, 043° Inbnd, \3W within 10 miles.

Facility on airport ° VCr facility on final approach crs, 600'.

011 ll>L V o R established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 0.0 miles of IDL VOR, make right climbing turn to3000

Caution- strniont • Y.OR* Hold E 1-minute left turns, inbnd crs 258°.

N, N landing minimums do not provide standard clearance over 277' stack 1.7 miles SSE of Runway 4R.

’ ° rk; Ptate > N ’Y.; Airport Name, International; Elev., 12 7 ; Fac. Class., BVORTAC; Ident., IDL; Procedure No. Ter VOR-4L/R, Arndt. 7; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63;

Sup. Arndt. No. 6; Dated, 2 Mar. 63

IDL-VOR..

Course and
distance

Minimum

altitude

(feet)

Condition

2-engine or less

More than
2-engine,
more than
65 knots

65 knots
or less

More than
65 knots

Direct_

1900

T-dn

300-1

200-4

Direct__

1900

C-dn_

600-1

600-14

S-dn-4L/R.

600-1

A-dn.

800-2

N »-214- 3

11678

RULES AND REGULATIONS

Terminal VOR Standard Instrument Approach Procedure— Continued

Transition

Ceiling and visibility minimums

From—

To—

Course and
distance

Minimum

altitude

(feet)

Condition

2-engine or less

More than
2 -engine,
more than
65 knots

65 knots
or less

More than
65 knots

Deer Park VOR....

IDL-VOR....

Direct...__

1900

T-dn

300-1

600-1

800-2

300-1
• 600-1
600-1
800-2

200 -H

600-B*

600-1

800-2

Sandy Hook Int_

IDL-VOR...

Direct

C-dn

S-dn-22R/L.

A-dn..

Radar vectoring authorized in accordance with approved patterns.

Procedure turn E# side of crs, 043° Outbnd, 223° Inbnd, 1900' within 10 miles.

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 0.0 mile of IDE VOR. make left climbine turn to
2000' on IDL VOR R-190 to Sandy Hook Int. Hold S of Sandy Hook Int right turns, 1-minute, Inbnd crs 010°.

^Procedure turn conducted E to avoid LaGuardia traffic.

City, New York; State, N.Y.; Airport Name, International; Elev., 12'; Fac. Class., BVORTAC; Ident., IDL; Procedure No. TerVOR-22R/L, Arndt. 8; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63-

Sup. Arndt. No. 7; Dated, 2 Mar. 63

Deer Park VOR (23.4-mile DME Fix

IDL-VOR R-065* (23.4-mile DME

23.4-mile

3000

T-dn.

300-1

IDL-VOR R-077).

Fix).

counterclock¬

C-dn.

1000-3

1006-3

wise arc.

A-dn__

1000-3

1006-3

IDL-VOR R-065 (23.4-mile DME Fix)....

Baldwin Int** (7-mile DME Fix)
(final).

Direct__

1900

Radar vectoring authorized in accordance with approved patterns.

Procedure turn not authorized. Radar vectors or DME transition to final approach are required.

Minimum altitude over facility on final approach crs, 1000'.

Crs and distance, breakoff point to approach end of Runway 25, 252°—3.0 miles.

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 0 mile of IDL-VOR, make a left climbing turn to
2000' on R-190 IDL-VOR to Sandy Hook VHF Int (19-mile DME fix), hold S 1-minute right turns Inbnd crs 010°.

* Final approach radial 065.

"Baldwin Int: Int IDI^VOR R-065 and LGA-VOR R-129.

City, New York; State, N.Y.; Airport Name, International; Elev., 12'; Fac. Class., BVORTAC; Ident., IDL; Procedure No, TerVOR-25, Amdt. 3; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63;

Sup. Amdt. No. 2; Dated, 2 Mar. 63

Deer Park VOR (23.4-mile DME Fix IDL-

IDL-VOR R-117* (23.4-mile DME

23.4-mile clock¬

3000

T-dn...

300-1

200-4

VOR R-077).

Fix).

wise arc.

C-dn.

1000-3

Sandy Hook VHF Int (19-mile DME Fix

IDL-VOR R-117* (19-mile DME

19-mile counter-

2000

A-dn__

1000-3

IDL VOR R-190).

Fix).

clock wise arc.

IDL-VOR R-117* (23.4- or 19-mile DME

Helen Int** (7-mile DME Fix) (final).

Direct...

1500

Fix).

Radar vectoring authorized in accordance with approved patterns.

Procedure turn not authorized. Radar vectors or DME transitions to final approach are required.

Minimum altitude over facility on final approach crs, 1000'.

Crs and distance, breakoff point to approach end of Runway 31R, 312°—2.4 miles. ^

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 0 mile of IDL-VOR, make a left climbing turn to 20w
on R-190 IDL-VOR to Sandy Hook VHF Int (19-mile DME fix). Hold S 1-minute right turns Inbnd crs 010°.

♦Final approach R-117.

♦♦Helen Int: Int IDL-VOR R-117 and DPK-VOR R-244.

City, New York; State, N.Y.; Airport Name, International; Elev., 12'; Fac. Class., BVORTAC; Ident., IDL; Procedure No. TerVOR-31R, Amdt. 2; Eff. Date, 9 Nov.

63; Sup. Amdt. No. 1; Dated. 2 Mar. 63

Deer Park VOR......

IDL VOR R-105.

Via radar vectors*.

2500

T-dn

300-1

Sandy Hook VHF Int.

IDL VOR R-105.

Via radar vectors*.

2500

C-dn_

700-1

" 700-1

700-14

Dianne Int#__

IDL VOR (final)##..

Via R-105....

700

A-dn

800-2

Radar vectoring authorized in accordance with approved patterns.

Procedure turn not authorized. Radar vectors to final approach crs required. Final approach radial 105.

Minimum altitude over facility on final approach crs, 700'.

Crs and distance, breakoff point to approach end of R-31R, 312°—1.6 miles. .

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or iflanding not accomplished within 0.0 mile of IDL VOR, make left climbing turn ww*
on R-190 of IDL VOR to Sandy Hook VHF Int. Hold S right turns 1-minute, 010° Inbnd.

Air Carrier Note: Sliding scale not authorized.

♦Radar vectors to final approach crs will intercept final approach radial E of the final approach fix.

##Maintain 2500' to Dianne Int J

#Dianne Int: Int DPK-VOR R-247 and IDI^-VOR R-105.

City, New York; State, N.Y.; Airport Name, International; Elev., 12'; Fac. Class., BVORTAC; Ident., IDL; Procedure No. TerVOR (R-105), Amdt. 3; Eff. Date »

9 Nov. 63; Sup. Amdt. No. 2; Dated, 5 Jan. 63

Deer Park VOR___

IDL VOR R-141.

Via radar

2500

T-dn_

300-1

200-Jf.

700-14

800-2

vectors.*

C-dn _ _ .

700-1

Sandy Hook VHF Int.

IDL VOR R-141...

Via radar

2500

A-dn_

800-2

Bonnie VHF Int#...

IDL VOR (final).

vectors.*

Via R-141_

700

Radar vectoring authorized in accordance with approved patterns.

Procedure turn not authorized. Radar vectors to final approach crs required final approach radial 141.

Minimum altitude over facility on final approach crs, 700'.

Crs and distance, breakoff point to approach end of R-31L, 312°—1.0 mile. rmbing turn to

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 0.0 mile of IDL VOR, make left-ennm b
2000' on 190° radial of IDL VOR to Sandy Hook Int. Hold S of-Sandy Hook Int right turns 1-minute 010° Inbnd.

Air Carrier Note: Sliding scale not authorized.

♦Radar vectors to final approach course will intercept final approach radial SE of the final approach fix.

#Bonnie VHF Int: Int DPK-VOR R-237 and IDL-VOR R-141. gNoV

City, New York; State, N.Y.; Airport Name, International; Elev., 12'; Fac. Class., BVORTAC; Ident., IDL; Procedure No. TerVOR (R-141), Amdt. 4; Eff. Date,

63; Sup. Amdt. No. 3; Dated, 19 Jan. 63

FEDERAL REGISTER

11679

Friday, November 1, 1963

4. By amending the following very high frequency omnirange-distance measuring equipment (VOR/DME) procedures

prescribed in § 97.15 to read:

K VOR-DME Standard Instrument Approach Procedure

Bearings, headings, courses and radials are magnetic. Elevations and altitudes are in feet MSL. Ceilings are in feet above airport elevation. Distances are in nautical
miles unless otherwise indicated, except visibilities which are in statute miles.

If an instrument approach procedure of the above type is conducted at the below named airport, it shall be in accordance with the following instrument approach procedure,
unless an approach is conducted in accordance with a different procedure for such airport authorized by the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Agency. Initial approaches
shall be made over specified routes. M inimum altitudes shall correspond with those established for en route operation in the particular area or as set forth below.

Transition

Ceiling and visibility minimums

From—

To-

Course and
distance

Minimum

altitude

(feet)

Condition

2-engine or less

More than

65 knots
or less

More than
65 knots

2-engine,
more than
65 knots

Deer Park VOR _

23.4-mile DME Fix R-141.

Via 23.4-mile orbit
(clockwise).

Via 19-mile orbit
(counterclock¬
wise).

3000

2000

T-dn.

300-1

600-1

800-2

300-1

600-1

800-2

200- H
600-1^
800-2

Sandy Book VHF Int __

19-mlie DME Fix R-141..

C-dn..

A-dn_

Radar vectoring authorized in accordance with approved patterns.

Procedure turn not authorized. Radar vectors or DME transitions to final approach required.

Minimum altitude on approach radial 19-mile DME fix to 4-mile DME fix R-141, 1500'; 4-mile DME fix to 3-mile DME fix R-141, 1200'; 3-mile DME fix to 2-milc DME
fix R-141, 90C'; 2-mile DME fix to 1-mile DME fix R-141, 600'.

Crs and distance, breakoff point to approach end of Runway 31L, 312°—1.0 mile.

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 0.0 mile of IDL-VOR, make left-climbing turn to 2000'
on R-190 IDL-VOR and proceed to Sandy Hook VHF Int, hold at Sandy Hook Int right turns, 1-minute, 010° Inbnd.

Am Carrier Note: Sliding scale not authorized.

City, New York; State, N.Y.; Airport Name, International; Elev., 12'; Fac. Class., BVORTAC; Ident., IDL; Procedure No. VOR/DME No. 1, Arndt. 2; Eff. Date, 9 Nov.

63; Sup. Arndt. No. 1; Dated, 2 Mar. 63

Deer Park VOR

23.4-mile DME Fix R-105.

Via 23.4-mile

3000

T-dn.

300-1

200-H

600-1 Yi
800-2

Sandy Hook VHF Int_._ _ _ _

19-mile DME Fix R-105.

orbit (clock¬
wise).

Via 19-mile orbit
(counterclock¬
wise) .

2000

C-dn..

A-dn.

600-1

800-2

600-1

800-2

Radar vectoring authorized in accordance with approved patterns.

Procedure turn not authorized. Radar vectors or DME transitions to final approach required.

Minimum altitude on approach radial 19-mile DME fix to 6-mile DME fix R-105, 1800'; 6-mile DME fix to 5-mile DME fix R-105, 1500'; 5-mile DME fix to 4-mile DME
fix R-105,1200'; 4-mile DME fix to 3-mile DME fix R-105, 900'; 3-mile DME fix to 2-mile DME fix R-105, 600'.

Crs and distance, breakoff point to approach end of Runway 31R, 312°—1.6 miles.

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landiifg not accomplished within 0.0 mile after passing IDL-VOR, make left climbing
turn to 2000' on R-190 IDL-VOR and proceed to Sandy Hook VHF Int. Hold at Sandy Hook VHF Int, right turns, 1-minute, 010° Inbnd.

Air Carrier Note: Sliding scale not authorized.

City, New York; State, N.Y.; Airport Name, International; Elev., 12'; Fac. Class., BVORTAC; Ident., IDL; Procedure No. VOR/DME No. 2, Arndt. 2; Eff. Date, 9 Nov.

63; Sup. Arndt. No. 1; Dated, 2 Mar. 63

5. By amending the following instrument landing system procedures prescribed in § 97.17 to read:

ILS Standard Instrument Approach Procedure

headings, courses and radials are magnetic. Elevations and altitudes are in feet MSL. Ceilings are in feet above airport elevation. Distances are in nautical
“Ries unlps otherwise indicated, except visibilities which are in statute miles.

unKq a 0 n h^trument approach procedure of the above type is conducted at the below named airport, It shall be in accordance with the following instrument approach procedure,
8haMho ap ? roac h ^ conducted in accordance with a different procedure for such airport authorized by the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Agency. Initial approaches
u 06 macle over specified routes. Minimum altitudes shall correspond with those established for en route operation in the particular area or as set forth below.

Transition

Ceiling and visibility minimums

From—

Course and
distance

Minimum

2-engine or less

More than
2-engine,
more than
65 knots

To-

altitude

(feet)

Condition

65 knots
or less

More than
65 knots

River Int

Dirfiftt.

1800

1500

T-dn

300-1

600-1

300-1

500-1

200-H

500-1

*3CO-2*

600-2

M«rean,»T t V0R .::::::::

LOM.

Direct

C-dn

K&? Int -

LOM

Dirp.ft.

1600

1300

fl_d n -13

*300-2*

600-2

*300-2*

600-2

int --------------

LOM (final).

Direct.

A-dn.

at gUde sl °P e Int Inbnd, 1300'.

. P visual s ? pe a ° d distance to approach end of runway at OM 1300°—3.8 miles, at MM 240°—0.5 mile.

oy ATC n \ i not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished climb to 1600' on 8E crs ILS within 20 miles or, when directed
*4004i rS5 t V climb t0 1600 ' on R -° 81 BTR-VOR within 10 miles of Cieole iDt or (2) turn left, climb to 1900' on R-041 BTR-VOR within 20 miles.

City b q d when gUde sl °Pe not utilized. Approach lights not installed.

aton Rouge; State, La.; Airport Name, Ryan; Elev., 70'; Fac. Class., ILS; Ident., I-BTR; Procedure No. ILS-13, Arndt. 9; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63; Sup. Arndt. No. 8;

Dated, 29 Sept. 62

11680

RULES AND REGULATIONS

ILS Standard Instrument Approach Procedure —Continued

Transition

Ceiling and visibility minimums

From—

To—

Course and
distance

Minimum

altitude

(feet)

Condition

2 -engine or less

More than
2 -engine,
more than
65 knots

65 knots
or less

More than
65 knots

Amite Tnt _ _ _ __

Creole Int (final)....

Direct.

900

2000

1600

T-dn.

300-1

500-1

400-1

800-2

300-1

500-1

400-1

800-2

200-K

500-1H

400-1

800-2

BTR-VOR

Creole Tnt

Direct_

C-dn_

Int SE crs ILS BTR-VOR R-109 .

Amite Tnt

Direct.

S-dn-31..

A-dD.

Procedure turn E side SE crs, 127° Outbnd, 307° Inbnd, 1600' within 10 miles of Creole Int.

No glide slope. -

Minimum altitude over Creole Int, 900'; over Amite Int. 1600'.

Crs and distance, Creole Int to airport, 307°—3.0 miles.

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished within 3.0 miles after passing Creole Int, climb to 1600' on
NW crs ILS within 10 miles of LOM, or when directed by ATC, turn right, climb to 1900' on BTR R-041 within 20 miles.

City. Baton Rouge; State, La.; Airport Name, Ryan; Elev., 70'; Fac. Class., ILS; Ident., I-BTR; Procedure No. ILS-31, Arndt. 6 ; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63; Sup. Arndt. No. 5;

Dated, 13 Oct. 62

BIL VOR

LOM .

Direct_

5300

T-dn*.

300-1

BIL RBn

LOM .

Direct_

5300

C-dn.

400-1

50C-1

Park city FTVT _ _ _

LOM.

Direct..

5300

S-dn-9#.

200 -%

Musselshell Int

LOM .

Direct_

6000

A-dn.

6G0-2

600-2

Rapelje DME Int**

LOM .

Direct__

5300

’Rvpffat.fi Tnt __

LOM...

Direct.

5300

12^m1le DME Fix on W crs of ILS.

LOM (final)./.

Direct...

5000

12-mile DME Fix R-284 BIL VOR

W crs ILS (final)...

Via R-284 BIL-

5000

VOR.

200-H
500—1H
200 -M
eoo-2

Procedure turn S side of crs, 275° Outbnd, 095° Inbnd, 5300' within 10 miles. Not authorized beyond 10 miles.

Minimum altitude at glide slope interception Inbnd, 5000'.

Altitude of glide slope and distance to approach end of runway at OM 4894'—4.0 miles; at MM 3815'—0.6 mile.

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished climb to 5200' on SE crs of the ILS within 15 miles or, wuen
directed by ATC, climb to 5300' on R-055 BIL-VOR within 20 miles, or climb to 5300' on R-114 BIL-VOR within 20 miles. .

Note: When authorized by ATC, BIL DME may be used to position aircraft on localizer course at 6000' between radial 249 clockwise to 330 via 12-miles DME arc witn
the elimination of procedure turn.

Other change: Deletes transition from Lavina FM.

*Takcoff below 300-1 not authorized on Runways 4-22 and 16-34.

**Rapelje DME Int: Int BIL-VOR R-284 and 25-mile DME fix.

#400-1 required when glide slope not utilized.

Citv Billings; State, Mont.; Airport Name, Logan Field; Elev., 3606'; Fac. Class., ILS; Ident., I-BIL; Procedure No. ILS-9, Amdt. 6 ; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63; Sup. Arndt. No.

5; Dated, 23 Mar. 63

Black Forest Int.

Hanover Int.

Security Int.

Pinon Int.

COS-VOR_

LOM .

Direct..

8200

T-dn#..v.

300-1

LOM

Direct _ _

7300

C-dn.

600-1

LOM .

Direct. _

7300

S-dn-35.

300-%

Security Tnt

Direct_

7300

A-dn.

600-2

LOM......

Direct.

8200

200-M
600-lH
300 -Vi
600-2

Radar vectoring authorized in accordance with approved patterns.

Procedure turn E side S crs, 166° Outbnd, 346° Inbnd, 7300' within 10 miles%.

Minimum altitude at glide slope Int Inbnd, 7300'. , „ „

Altitude of glide slope and distance to approach end of runway at OM. 7240'—3.7 miles; at.MM, 6320 —0.5 mile. „ PC n 74 ° from LMM

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished make a right-climbing turn to 8000 on crs 0/4 irom
within 15 miles or, when directed by ATC, make right-climbing turn and climb to 8000' on COS-VOR R-152 within 20 miles of VOli.

Caution: 7190' tower 8 miles N of airport; 7923' tower 14 miles N of airport; sharply rising terrain W of airport.

Other changes: Deletes transition from Fountain FM.

#400-1 required for takeoff on Runways 30 and 35, except when monitored by departure radar.

% Restricted area 3 miles W. ^

City Colorado Springs; State, Colo.; Airport Name, Peterson Field; Elev., 6172'; Fac. Class., ILS; Ident., I-COS; Procedure No. ILS-35, Amdt. 15; Eff. Date, 9 Nov.

Sup. Amdt. No. 14; Dated, 2 Feb. 63

rif qtiKv Tnt

LOM .—

Direct.

2700

T-dn.

300-1

C-d.

C-n.

S-dn-13..

A-dn.

400-1

400-1%

300-%

600-2

300-1
600-1
500-1%
300-%
600-2

200-H

500-1H
300 -%
600-2

Procedure turn N side NW crs, 310° Outbnd, 130° Inbnd, 2500' within 10 miles.

Minimum altitude at glide slope Int Inbnd, 2200'.

Altitude of glide slope and distance to approach end of runway at LOM, 2132'—3.8 miles; at LMM, 1158 —0.4 mile. nmnhv Int or, when

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished climb to 2800' on SE crs ILS, proceed to uranoy
directed by ATC, make left turn, climbing to 2500' and proceed to LOM.

Note: Approach from holding pattern not authorized. Procedure turn required.

Caution: 2049' tower 11 miles WNW of airport. ^ 7 ;

c. Class., ILS; Ident., I-JLN; Procedure No. ILS-13, Amdt. 8 ; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63; Sup. Am
Dated, 23 Mar. 63

City, Joplin; State, Mo.; Airport Name, Joplin Municipal; Elev., 980'; Fac. <

ffranhv Tnt

Webb City Int# (final)...

Direct.

2700

T-dn..

300-1

TT. T.OA/T

Webb City Int#_

Direct..

2800

C-dn.

500-1%

S-dn-31_

500-1%

A-dn...

800-2

300-1

500-1J4

500-1%

800-2

300-1

500-$

500 - 1 #

800-2

Procedure turn E side of SE crs, 130° Outbnd, 310° Inbnd, 2800' within 10 miles of Webb City Int.#

No glide slope. Minimum altitude over Webb City Int# on final approach crs, 2700'.

Crs and distance, Webb City Int# to airport, 310°—5.9 miles. , .... , . „iv«hhCitvInt,#c

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing mmimums or if landmg not accomplished within 5.9 miles after passing v> odd isuy
on the NW crs of JLN localizer to JL LOM.

Note: Procedure authorized only when aircraft equipped to receive ILS and VOR simultaneously.

Caution: 2049'tower 11 miles WNW of airport. , TJL

Other change: Deletes transitions from Diamond Int to Webb City Int and Granby Int to Diamond Int.

#Webb City Int: Int EOS-VOR R-357 and SE crs JLN localizer. Anldt Mo. ft

City, Joplin; State, Mo.; Airport Name, Joplin Municipal; Elev., 980'; Fac. Class., ILS; Ident., I-JLN; Procedure No. ILS-31, Amdt. 7; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 6 o, > U

Dated, 23 Feb. 63

Friday, November 1, 1963

FEDERAL REGISTER

ILS Standard Instrument Approach Procedure— Continued

11681

Transition

Ceiling and visibility minimums

From—

To-

Course and
distance

Minimum

altitude

(feet)

Condition

2-engine or less

More than
2-engine,
more than
65 knots

65 knots
or less

More than
65 knots

GGG-VOR.

LOM.

Direct,

1900

T-dn

300-1

500-1

200-K

600-2

300-1

500-1

200-i^

600-2

200-H

500-1)^

200-M

600-2

Int UIM-VOR R-140 and GGG-VOR

R-265.

Marshall VOR.

LOM.

Direct.

C-dn

LOM.

S-dn-13_

Direct

A-dn_

Procedure turn S side of NW crs, 306° Outbnd, 126° Inbnd, 1900' within 10 miles.

Minimum altitude at glide slope Int Inbnd, 1900'.

Altitude of glide slope and distance to approach end of runway at OM, 1856'—5.5 miles; at MM, 545'—0.6 mile.

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished climb to 1900' on SE ers of GGG-ILS within 20 miles
Caution: 644' tower 5 miles NW of airport, 870' tower 9 miles WSW of airport.

City, Longview: State Tex.; Airport Name, Gregg County Municipal; Elev., 365'; Fac. Class., ILS; Ident., I-GGG; Procedure No. ILS-13, Arndt 3* Eff Date 9 Nov 63-

Sup. Arndt. No. 2; Dated, 12 Jan. 63 * * *

GGG VOR_ ___ _ .

Cherokee Int*..

Direct

1900

2100

1400

T-dn

300-1

400-1

800-2

300-1

500-1

400-1

800-2

Marshall VOR.

Tatum Int**.

ASL R-222

p_dn

200-H

Int GGG R-0S3 and ASL R-222.

Tatum Int**.

ASL R-222 * I I

R-dn-31

600-134

400-1

Cushing Int..

Tatum Int**.....

ASL R-222.

Direct

A-<Jn

Tatum Int**.

Cherokee Int* (final)

800-2

Procedure turn E side of ers, 126° Outbnd, 306° Inbnd, 1900' within 10 miles of Cherokee Int.

No glide slope.

Minimum altitude over Cherokee Int* on final approach ers, 1400'.

Crs and distance, Cherokee Int* to airport, 306°—4.6 miles.

onNW^GG gTlS witWn b 20 mUcs P ° n deScent t0 authorized landi ^g minimums or if landing not accomplished within 4.6 miles after passing Cherokee Int,* climb to 2000'

Caution; 044' tower 5 miles N W of airport; 870' tower 9 miles WSW of airport.

Cherokee Int; Int GGG ILS SE crs (300° Inbnd) and Marshall VOR R-243.

*Tatum Int: Int GGG ILS SE crs (306° Inbnd) and Marshall VOR R-222.

City, Longview; State, Tex.; Airport Name, Gregg County Municipal; Elev., 365'; Fac. Class., ILS; Ident., I-GGG; Procedure No. ILS-31, Arndt. 2; Eff Date 9 Nov 63-

Sup. Arndt. No. 1; Dated, 5 May 62 * * *

Cuba Int.

LOM..__

Direct

1800

1900

1800

1700

1900

T-dn**%_

300-1

600-1

200-^

600-2

300-1

Oakville Int.

LOM.

Direct

O-dn

Bruins RBn__

LOM..

Direct

500—1

Waverly Int .

LOM (final).

Direct

D—U 11—yffW --.-

A-dn

200-H

Miller Int

LOM.

Direct

600-2

Memphis VOR

LOM..

Direct.

-—------

20043
500-VA
20 (hH
600-2

Radar vectoring authorized in accordance with approved patterns.

Procedure turn S side W crs, 267° Outbnd, 087° Inbnd, 1800' within 10 miles.

Mmimu m altitude at glide slope Int Inbnd, 1700'.

IfviQM i ° f g * lid ? slope distance ^ approach end of runway at OM 1650'—4.3 miles, at MM 540'—0.6 mile.

"CW by MEMivoK&^ilT " “ DOt accom P lisbed climb to 1900 '« E « ** (08T) within 15 miles or, when di-

im ' E ofrunway threshold -

^arge flashers middle nSSfnnS? for L an n in f on R unway 9, provided all components of the ILS, high intensity runway lights, approach lights, condenser dis-
•*, Jjjh the ap“ifghte& toSSiMuSl SttfiSSK isdSolfflT 0pera,mg satisfactOT “y- Descmt MSL shal > “<>‘ b « ™ d « unless visual con-

Cit Umvay V1SUal range 2600/ alS0 authorized for takeoff on Runway 9 in lieu of 200-^ when 200->i is authorized; provided high intensity runway lights are operational.

1 7, Memphis; State, Term.; Airport Name, Memphis Municipal; Elev., 331'; Fac. Class., ILS; Ident., I-MEM; Procedure No. ILS-9, Arndt. 8; Eff. Date 9 Nov 63- Sud

Arndt. No. 7; Dated, 20 Apr. 63 ’ * *

MEM-vor

Oakville Int* .

Direct

1900

T-dn#

C-dn.

300-1

500-1

300-1

600-1

200 -y 2
500-1H

S-dn-27.

400-1

^----

A-dn_

800-2

No glide sw n E crs> ? 87 ° 0utbnd > 267° Inbnd, 1900' within 10 miles from Oakville Int.
tP If visual contact not^I?a U mi«S! t lJ Ude ov i r 0a ^ vdle on final approach crs, 1300'. Crs and distance, Oakville Int to airport, 267°—3.5 miles.

*7aS dfre^T/iVTSrT^ 3 * 5 mileS aftCr “ °" ** climb to 1800 ' on

SKfSS JiTJSfi on Runway 14 - 32 -

J, Memphis, State, Tenn.; Airport Name, Memphis Municipal; Elev., 331'; Fac. Class., ILS; Ident., I-MEM; Procedure No. ILS-27, Arndt. 8; Eff. Date 9 Nov 63-

Snr» AmHt TsJrt 7* TVntrwl on A nr r.'J ’ ■ ’

fet 0E ;.

feA--:;::::::.

LOM.

LOM (final).I

T HA/f /fivinl)

Direct..

Direct.

Direct...

1900

1700

1600

1900

T-dn.

C-dn..

S-dn-35*.

A-dn.

300-1

500-1

200-M

600-2

300-1

500-1

200-H

600-2

200-H
500-1 y*

200 -y 2
600-2

jgRi? .

p °rter Int_Hl~.

i^uivi tnnai)_

LOM.

Direct....

Direct...

Direct.

Direct...

Radar vectorina Q f-u --"—-

' within 10 miles.

^itude of glidec? at n glide ®! ope Int Inbnd, 1700'.

»heriH Visual intact kii tT®? 06 to a PP roach end of runway at OM, 1607'—4.7 miles; at MM, 514'—0.6 mile.

u oirected by ATC tiWi \*ttu u JP* n authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished climb to 2500' on crs of 354° from LOM within 15 miles or,

„ ^~h required cllmb to 1900 on R " 22 0 MEM-VOR within 15 miles.

c “y. Mempbi s; Zl Z ^

’ " 1 erm ’ ; Alr port Name, Memphis Municipal; Elev., 331'; Fac. Class., ILS; Ident., I-TSE; Procedure No. ILS-35, Arndt. Orig.; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63or

upon commissioning of facility

11682

RULES AND REGULATIONS

ILS Standard Instrument Approach Procedure— Continued

Transition

Ceiling and visibility minimum *

From—

To-

Course and
distance

Minimum

Condition

2-engine or less

More than
2 -engine,
more than

65 knots

altitude

(feet)

65 knots
or less

More than
65 lmots

Deer Park VOR (23.4-miles DME Fix IDL
R-078).

Roslyn VHF Int#..

IDL R-078 to

2000

T-dn**_

300-1

500-1

300-1
500-1
' 200-%
600-2

200-%

500-1%

200-%

600-2

11.4 mile

C-dn.

counter clock¬

S-dn-22L*.

200-%

600-2

wise arc.

A-dn.

Roslyn VHF Int#....

OM (final)....

Direct. _

1700

1900

Idewild VOR. .....

OM......

Direct. _ _.

Deer Park VOR__

Roslyn VHF Int#..

LGA R-101.

2000

Radar vectoring authorized in accordance with approved patterns.

Procedure turn E side of NE crs, 043° Outbnd, 223° Inbnd, 1900' within 10 miles of OM (nonstandard to avoid LQA traffic).

Minimum altitude at glide slope Int Inbnd, 1700'.

Altitude of glide slope and distance to approach end of runway at OM, 1690'—5.6 miles; at MM, 216'—0.6 mile.

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished climb to 500' on S W crs ILS, make climbing-left turn to 2000'
on IDL R-190 to Sandy Hook VHF Int (19-mile DME fix), hold S 1-minute right turns Inbnd crs 010°.

Caution: Circling minimums do not provide standard clearance over the following obstructions: 277' stack 1.1 miles SSE of runway 4R.

*400-% required when glide slope not utilized.

** Runway visual range 2000' is authorized for takeoff on Runway 31L and 4R in lieu of 200-% when 200-% is authorized provided associated high intensity runway lights are
operational.

#Roslyn Int: Int LQA VOR R-101 and IDL NE ILS crs (11.4-mile DME fix IDL VOR R-042).

City, New York; State, N.Y.; Airport Name, International; Elev., 12'; Fac. Class., ILS; Ident., I-IWY; Procedure No. ILS-22L, Arndt. 9; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63; Sup. Arndt.

No. 8; Dated, 27 July 63

Sioux Falls RBn...

LOM _

Direct_

2700

T-dn*

300-1

500-1

300-%

600-2

300-1

500-1

300-%

600-2

200-%

500-1%

300-%

600-2

Sioux Falls VOR....

LOM.

Direct_

2700

C-dn_

Int LOM 295° bearing and FSD-VOR R-
160.

LOM.

Direct__

2700

S-dn-3#**_

A-dn.

Int LOM 087° bearing and FSD-VOR R-
222.

17-mile DME Fix on SW crs of the localizer..

LOM.

Direct_

2700

LOM (final).

Direct__

2600

Procedure turn S side SW crs 206° Outbnd, 026° Inbnd, 2700' within 10 miles.

Minimum altitude at glide slope Int Inbnd, 2600'.

Altitude of glide slope and distance to approach end of runway at OM, 2526'—3.7 miles; at MM, 1623'—0.5 mile.

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished climb to 2800' on NE crs of ILS within 20 miles.
Caution: Tower 1628' 1.5 miles NE of LOM.

Note: When authorized by ATC, FSD DME may be used to position aircraft on localizer course at 3400' between radial 145° clockwise to 300° via 17-mile DME arc with
the elimination of procedure turn. No approach lights.

*300-1 required for takeoff Runway 15.

#500-1 required when.glide slope not utilized.

**400-% authorized lor aircraft equipped to receive ILS and VOR simultaneously and R-168 FSD identified on final.

City, Sioux Falls; State, S. Dak.; Airport Name, Fosa Field; Elev., 1426'; Fac. Class., ILS; Ident., I-FSD; Procedure No. ILS-3, Arndt. 7; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63; Sup. Arndt.

No. 6; Dated, 15 June 63

PBI-VOR......

LOM...

Direct . _

1600

T-dn

300-1

*400-1

300-1

PBI-LFR...

LOM.

Direct_

1600

C-dn

500-1

Monet Int...

LOM......

Direct.

1600

S-dn-9*

200-%

600-2

200 -%

Andrews Int_

LOM.

Direct_

2000

A-dn

600-2

Shawnee Int# (final)..

LOM.

Direct..

1600

Morgan Int._____

LOM.

Direct___

1600

Willy Int.

LOM.

Direct .

1600

Pompano Int.

LOM.

Direct_

2000

200 -%

500-1%

200 -%

600-2

Procedure turn N side of crs, 273° Outbnd, 093° Inbnd, 1600' within 10 miles.

Minimum altitude at glide slope interception Inbnd, 1600'.

Altitude of glide slope and distance to approach end of runway at OM, 1560'—5.6 miles; at MM, 217'—0.6 mile. M

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished climb to 1600' on E crs of ILS within 20 miles of LOM.
*500-% required when glide slope not utilized.

#Shawnee Int may be used in lieu of procedure turn when authorized by West Palm Beach approach control.

City, West Palm Beach; State, Fla.; Airport Name, Palm Beach International; Elev., 19'; Fac. Class., ILS; Ident., I-PBI; Procedure No. ILS-9, Arndt. 3; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63,

or upon commissioning of ALS; Sup. Amdt. No. 2; Dated, 4 May 63

FEDERAL REGISTER

11683

Friday, November 1, 1963

6. By amending the following radar procedures prescribed in § 97.19 to read:

Radar Standard Instrument Approach Procedure

Bearings, headings, courses and radials are magnetic. Elevations and altitudes are in feet, MSL. Ceilings are in feet above airport elevation. Distances are In nautical
miles unless otherwise indicated, except visibilities which are in statute miles.

If a radar instrument approach is conducted at the below named airport, it shall be in accordance with the following instrument procedure, unless an approach is conducted
in accordance with a different procedure for such airport authorized by the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Agency. Initial approaches shall be made over specified
routes. Minimum altitude(s) shall correspond with those established for en route operation in the particular area or as set forth below. Positive identification must be estab¬
lished with the radar controller. From initial contact with radar to final authorized landing minimums, the instructions of the radar controller are mandatory except when
(A) visual contaot is established on final approach at or before descent to the authorized landing minimums, or (B) at pilot’s discretion if it appears desirable to discontinue
the approach, except when the radar controller may direct otherwise prior to final approach, a missed approach shall be executed as provided below when (A) communication
on final approach is lost for more than 5 seconds during a precision approach, or for more than 30 seconds during a surveillance approach; (B) directed by radar controller;
(C) visual contact is not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums; or (D) if landing is not accomplished.

Transition

Ceiling and visibility minimums

From—

To—

Course and
distance

Minimum

altitude

(feet)

Condition

2 -engine or less

More than
2 -engine,
more than

65 knots

65 knots
or less

More than
65 knots

040°..

185°.

Within:

20 miles

1900

1800

Surveillance approach

200 -H
5004*4
400-1

800-2

186°.

040°.

20 miles.

T-dn*..

III i

Hi i

C-dn#.

S-dn-27, 3, 35,
17, 9, 21.

A-dn.

All bearings and distances are from radar antenna site with sector azimuths progressing clockwise. Radar control must provide 3 miles or 1000' vertical separation; or 3 to 5
miles and 500' vertical separation from following towers: 1349' 9.7 miles NE, 1340' 8.0 miles NE, 975' 9.2 miles NE, and 1333' 8.7 miles NE.

If visual contact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or iflanding not accomplished Runway 27 and 21: Turn left, climb to 1900'on R-220MEM-
V0R within 15 miles. Runway 3: Turn right, climb to 1900 7 on R-135 MEM-VOR within 15 miles. Runway 9: Climb to 1900' on R-135 MEM-VOR within 15 miles. Run¬
way 35: Turn right, climb to 1900' on R-135 MEM-VOR within 15 miles. Runway 17: Turn right, climb to 1900' on R-220 MEM-VOR within 15 miles.

*Air Carrier Note: Takeoffs with less than 20044 not authorized on Runway 14-32.

/Radar approach not authorized on Runway 14-32.

City, Memphis; State, Tenn.; Airport Name, Memphis Municipal; Elev., 331'; Fac. Class, and Ident., Memphis Radar; Procedure No. 1, Arndt. 8 ; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63; Sun*

Arndt. No. 7; Dated. 22 June 63

All directions..

Radar site

Within 25 miles....

•1500

finrrrpfllfl.niN' aTinmneh

T-dn..

300-1

20044

C-dn#_

400-1

500-1

500-1*4

C-dn##_

500-1

600-1

500-1*4

S-dn#_ _

400-1

S-dn##_

600-1

500-1

—

A-dn__

800-2

i vv vls ^™tact not established upon descent to authorized landing minimums or if landing not accomplished climb to 1500' straight ahead, then proceed to New Orleans

K or VOK or proceed as directed by ATC.

Cauuon: 409' radio tower 2.3 miles N of airport and 452' electric transmission towers 4.3 miles SE of airport,
airport ar contro1 must P rovide 3-mile lateral or 1000 ' vertical separation from 623' and 563' radio towers located 12 miles ESE of airport and from 978' TV tower 16 miles E of

{Runways 10, 23, 28.

//Runways 1 , 6 , 19.

City, New Orleans; State, La.; Airport Name, New Orleans International; Elev., 3'; Fac. Class, and Ident., New Orleans Radar; Procedure No. 1 , Arndt. 2 ; Eff. Date, 9 Nov.

63; Sup. Arndt. No. 1; Dated, 13 Apr. 57

All directions..

established upon descent to authorized landing minimums of iflanding not accomplished Runways 4R, 4L, 7R: Make right-climbing turn to 3000'
fi °ok Int 5nR i P PK V0R - Rold E 1-minute left turns, Inbnd ers 257°. Runways 22R, 25L, 31R: Make left-climbing turn to 2000' on IDL VOR R-190 to Sandy
i E xcentw Af r ri « h 1 tuTns i Inbnd CTS 010 °-

Caution- u A "Y9 R radials 046 -220°, 2500' minimum altitude required

*Runwav vi«,oi mln tomms do not provide standard clearance over 278' stack 1.1 miles SSE of airport.

operational. UW range 2000 ^ authorized for takeoff on Runway 4R and 31L in lieu of 200-*4 when 200-*4 is authorized; provided associated high intensity runway lights

dlscharge^asLri^LiHi 1 ^ 6 also ft uthorized for landing on Runway 4R; provided that all components of the PAR, high intensity runway lights, approach lights, condenser

contact wSi, and °, u * er compass locators and all related airborne equipment are in satisfactory operating condition. Descent below 212^ shall not be made unless
New U “ approach lights has been established or the aircraft is clear of clouds.

^°rk, State, N.Y.; Airport Name, International; Elev., 12 ?; Fac. Class, and Ident., Idlewild Radar; Procedure No. 1, Arndt. 5; Eff. Date, 9 Nov. 63; Sup. Arndt.

No. 4; Dated, 3 Aug. 63

These procedures shall become effective on the dates specified therein.

TT»o

(49 u g q are made under the authority of sections 307(c), 313(a), and 601 of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958

' 134 8(C), 1354(a), 1421; 72 Stat. 749, 752, 775).

Issued m Washington, D.C., on October 8,1963.

W. Lloyd Lane,

Acting Director , Flight Standards Service .

[F.R.Doc. 63-10856; Filed, Oct. 31,1963; 8:50 a.m.]

Radar site....,.

Within:

25 miles_

2500

Radar site__

20 miles_

1500

Precision approach

C-dn.

S-dn-4R**
A-dn-4R_.

I 500-1 1

500-1 1

200-*4

200-*4]

.| 600-2

600-2 I

500-1*4

200 - 1/4

600-2

Surveillance approach

T-dn*_

300-1

200-*4

C-dn.

600-1

600-1*4

S-dn-4 L_

600-1

S-dn-22R, 25L_.

500-1

S-dn-7R, 31R...

400-1

A-dn-All_

800-2

11684

RULES AND REGULATIONS

Title 19—CUSTOMS DUTIES

Chapter I—Bureau of Customs, De¬
partment of the Treasury

[T. D. 56037]

PART 13—EXAMINATION AND
MEASUREMENT OF CERTAIN PROD¬
UCTS

Entry, Sampling and Determination of
Clean Content of Imported Wool or
Hair

Inasmuch as customs Form 6449 has
been abolished, the Customs Regulations
are amended as follows:

Section 13.13(c) is deleted.

Section 13.14(e) is amended by insert¬
ing a period after “clean yield” in the
third sentence and deleting “and shall
be supported by a certificate in duplicate
on customs Form 0449 when such a cer¬
tificate has not been filed previously.”
The paragraph as amended will read as
follows:

(e) The appraiser shall promptly no¬
tify the importer of record, the owner,
or the transferee, as the case may be, by
mail of the percentage clean yield found
by him. If such person is dissatisfied
with the appraiser’s finding, he may file
with the appraiser a written request in
duplicate for another laboratory test for
percentage clean yield. Such request
shall be filed within 14 calendar days
after the date of mailing of the notice
of the appraiser’s finding of clean yield.
The request shall be granted if it ap¬
pears to the appraiser to be made in
good faith and if a second general sam¬
ple, as provided for in paragraph (c) of
this section is available for testing, or
if all packages, or, in the opinion of the
Bureau, an adequate number of the
packages, represented by the general
sample are available and in their orig¬
inal imported condition. The second
test shall be made upon the second gen¬
eral sample, if such a sample is avail¬
able. If the second general sample is
not available, the packages shall be re¬
weighed, resampled, and tested in ac¬
cordance with the provisions of this sec¬
tion. All costs and expenses of such
operations, exclusive of the compensa¬
tion of customs officers, shall be borne
by the person who requested the further
test. Such person may be present dur¬
ing such resampling and testing. If he
is dissatisfied with the results of the
second laboratory test, or if a second
laboratory test is not feasible, the wool
or hair may be retested subject to the
conditions and in the manner provided
for in § 13.15(c). (Sec. 101, 76 Stat. 72;
Sch. 3, part 1C, hdnote. 6, Tariff Sched¬
ules of the United States.)

(R.S. 161, as amended, 251, sec. 624, 46 Stat.
759, sec. 101, 76 Stat. 72; 5 U.S.C. 22, 19 U.S.C.

66, 1624, Gen. Hdnote. 11, Tariff Schedules
of the United States)

[seal] Philip Nichols, Jr.,

Commissioner of Customs.

Approved: October 24, 1963.

James A. Reed,

Assistant Secretary of the
Treasury.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11563; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;
8:46 a.m.]

Title 29—LABOR

Chapter V—Wage and Hour Division,
Department of Labor
SUBCHAPTER A—REGULATIONS

PART 608—HANDKERCHIEF, SCARF,

AND ART LINEN INDUSTRY IN
PUERTO RICO

Wage Rates

Pursuant to sections 5, 6, and 8 of the
Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29
U.S.C. 205, 206, and 208), the Secretary
of Labor by Administrative Order No.
578 (28 F.R. 10270) appointed and con¬
vened Review Committee 6-C and re¬
ferred to it and duly noticed a hearing on
the question of the minimum rate or
rates of wages to be paid under para¬
graph (C) of Proviso (1) of subsection
6(c) of the Act in lieu of those provided
under paragraph (B) of Proviso (1) to
employees in the handkerchief, scarf, and
art linen industry in Puerto Rico as that
industry is defined in 29 CFR 608.1.

Subsequent to an investigation and a
hearing conducted pursuant to the
notice, the committee filed with the ad¬
ministrator a report containing its find¬
ings and recommendations with respect
to the matters referred to it.

Accordingly, as authorized and re¬
quired by sections 6 and 8 of the Fair
Labor Standards Act of 1938, Reorgani¬
zation Plan No. 6 of 1950 (3 CFR 1949-
53 Comp., p. 1004), and General Order
No. 45-A of the Secretary of Labor (15
F.R. 3290), the recommendations of the
committee are hereby published in this
order amending 29 CFR 608.2 (a)(1),

(b)(1), (c)(1), and (d)(1), effective
November 3, 1963, to read as follows:

§ 608.2 Wage rates.

* * * * *

(a) (1) Hand-sewing classification. 31
cents an hour.

* * * * *

(b) (1) Other operations classification.
57 cents an hour.

*****

(d) (1) Other operations on oblong
scarves classification. 88 cents an hour.
(Sec. 8, 52 Stat. 1064; 29 U.S.C. 208)

Signed at Washington, D.C., this 29th
day of October 1963.

Clarence T. Lundqust,
Administrator.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11572; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;
8:47 a.m.]

PART 609—WOMEN’S AND CHIL¬
DREN’S UNDERWEAR AND
WOMEN’S BLOUSE INDUSTRY IN
PUERTO RICO

Wage Rates

Pursuant to sections 5, 6, and 8 of the
Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29
U.S.C. 205, 206, and 208), the Secretary
of Labor by Administrative Order No.
578 (28 F.R. 10270) appointed and con¬
vened Review Committee 6-B and re¬
ferred to it and duly noticed a hearing
on the question of the minimum rate or
rates of wages to be paid under para¬
graph (C) of Proviso (1) of subsection
6(c) of the Act in lieu of those provided
under paragraph (B) of Proviso (1) to
employees in the women’s and children’s
underwear and women’s blouse industry
in Puerto Rico as that industry is de¬
fined in 29 CFR 609.1.

Subsequent to an investigation and a
hearing conducted pursuant to the no¬
tice, the committee filed with the Ad¬
ministrator a report containing its find¬
ings and recommendations with respect
to the matters referred to it.

Accordingly, as authorized and re¬
quired by sections 6 and 8 of the Pair
Labor Standards Act of 1938, Reorga¬
nization Plan No. 6 of 1950 (3 CFR 1949-
53 Comp., p. 1004), and General Order
No. 45-A of the Secretary of Labor (15
F.R. 3290), the recommendations of the
committee are hereby published in this
order amending 29 CFR 609.2 effective
November 3, 1963, to read as follows:

§ 609.2 Wage rates.

The women’s and children’s under¬
wear and women’s blouse industry in
Puerto Rico is divided into three classi¬
fications. Wages at rates not less than
those prescribed in this section shall
be paid under subsection 6(c) of tne
Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 oy
every employer to each of his employee
in each of the classifications in tn
women’s and children’s underwear a
women’s blouse industry in Puerto ki
who in any workweek is engaged in co f '
merce or in the production of g oods .
commerce or is employed in . aI J.
prise engaged in commerce or in thep ‘
duction of goods for commerce as in
terms are defined in section 3 otjb**'
(a) Previously covered classifiedu •
The classifications in this paragraph
apply to all activities of employees w
women’s and children’s underwear
women’s blouse industry in pu f. rto nHfh .
to whom section 6 of the Act applies w
out reference to the Fair Labor oi
ards Amendments of 1961.

FEDERAL REGISTER

11685

Friday , November 1, 1963

(1) Hand-sewing classification, (i)
The minimum wage for this classifica¬
tion is 78 cents an hour.

(ii) This classification is defined as
the operations of hand-sewing, hand-
embroidering, hand-embellishing, orna¬
mental stitching, and similar operations
involving decorative effects: Provided ,
however, That mending, repairing, sew¬
ing of labels, tacking, and similar opera¬
tions on articles which are wholly
machine-sewn or machine-knit shall not
be included.

(2) Other operations classification .
(i) The minimum wage for this classifi¬
cation is 95.5 cents an hour.

(ii) This classification is defined as
all operations in the women’s and chil¬
dren’s underwear and women’s blouse
industry in Puerto Rico, other than those
operations in the hand-sewing and new
coverage classifications.

(b) New coverage classification. (1)
The minimum wage for this classifica¬
tion is 75 cents an hour.

(2) This classification is defined as all
activities of employees in the industry
to whom section 6 of the Act applies only
by reason of the Pair Labor Standards
Amendments of 1961.

(Sec. 8, 52 Stat. 1064; 29 U.S.C. 208)

Signed at Washington, D.C., this 29th

day of October 1963.

Clarence T. Lundquist,

Administrator.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11574; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;

8:47 a.m.]

SUBCHAPTER B— STATEMENTS OF GENERAL POL¬
ICY OR INTERPRETATION NOT DIRECTLY RE¬
NTED TO REGULATIONS

PART 782—EXEMPTION FROM MAX¬
IMUM HOURS FOR CERTAIN EM¬
PLOYEES OF MOTOR CARRIERS

Miscellaneous Amendments

Part 782 of Title 29 of the Code of Fed¬
eral Regulations is hereby amended in
the manner indicated below in order to
adapt it to statutory changes in the Mo¬
tor Carrier Act (49 U.S.C. 303) and recent
decisions by the courts and the Inter-
tate Commerce Commission. As these
f*hendment£ are concerned solely with
tentative rules, neither public pro-
rpn - re nor de * ay in the effective date is
reqmrcd by the Administrative Procedure

they wil1 be come effective im¬
mediately.

para &raph beginning with
Footnote 7 to 29 CFR 782.1 is

revised to read as follows:

8*..l Statutory provisions considered.

vehicle’ term ‘ con tract carrier by mote
fransporStimf t ny person which engages i
gers or by motor vehicle of passer

commerce^ £f rty in interst ate or foreig
^sportati™?. c . ompensation (other tha

of this sectif^ r ! fe I red in ( 14

Under conti and the exce Ption therein
0r a limits Uing con traets with one perso
tor the fiuni^u! nber of P ersons either (a
through thp * in , g 0f transportation servic<
tor a contiTT.i ® Signment °* motor vehicl<
8lve use of Period of time to the excli
ach person served or (b) for tl
No. 214 _4

furnishing of transportation services de¬
signed to meet the distinct need of each indi¬
vidual customer.”

2. Footnote 10 to 29 CFR 782.1 is re¬
vised to read as follows:

10 Motor Carrier Act, sec. 203(a) (10), (11),
49 U.S.C., sec. 303(a) (10), (11):

**(10) The term ‘interstate commerce’
means commerce between any place in a
State and any place in another State or
between places in the same State through
another State, whether such commerce moves
wholly by motor vehicle or partly by motor
vehicle and partly by rail, express, or water:
Provided, That to the extent that such trans¬
portation in ‘interstate commerce’ between
points in Alaska and points in other States
is performed within a foreign country, the
application of this chapter shall not include
any requirement as to conduct In such for¬
eign country which is in conflict with a re¬
quirement of such foreign country, but shall
include as a condition to engaging in such
operations within the Jurisdiction of the
United States, the observance, as to the en¬
tire service, of the requirements of this
chapter with respect to rates, fares, charges,
and practices pertaining to such transporta¬
tion.”

‘*(11) The term ‘foreign commerce’ means
commerce, whether such commerce moves
wholly by motor vehicle or partly by motor
vehicle and partly by rail, express, or water,
(A) between any place in the United States
and any place in a foreign country, or be¬
tween places in the United States through a
foreign country; or (B) between any place
in the United States and any place in a
Territory or possession of the United States
insofar as such transportation takes place
within the United States. The term ‘for¬
eign commerce’ also includes transportation
between places in a foreign country, or be¬
tween a place in one foreign country and a
place in another foreign country, insofar as
such transportation takes place within the
United States, but only for purposes of the
application, to carriers engaged in such trans¬
portation, of the following provisions of this
chapter: section 315 of this title (which
relates to insurance for the protection of the
public), section 321 of this title (which re¬
lates to designation of an agent for service
of process), and those provisions of section
304 of this title which relate to qualifications
and maximum hours of service of employees
and safety of operation and equipment.”

3. The paragraph beginning with '‘Mo¬
tor Carrier Act sec. 203(b), 49 U.S.C.
303(b)in Footnote 12 to 29 CFR 782.1
is revised to read as follows:

12 * * *

Motor Carrier Act sec. 203(b), 49 U.S.C.
303(b):

‘‘Nothing in this part, except the provi¬
sions of section 204 relative to qualifications
and maximum hours of service of employees
and safety of operation or standards of equip¬
ment shall be construed to include (1) motor
vehicles employed solely in transporting
school children and teachers to or from
school; or (2) taxicabs, or other motor ve¬
hicles performing a bona fide taxicab service,
having a capacity of not more than six pas¬
sengers and not operated on a regular route
or between fixed termini; or (3) motor ve¬
hicles owned or operated by or on behalf of
hotels and used exclusively for the transpor¬
tation of hotel patrons between hotels and
local railroad or other common carrier sta¬
tions; or (4) motor vehicles operated, under
authorization, regulation, and control of the
Secretary of the Interior, principally for the
purpose of transporting persons in and about
the national parks and national monuments;
or (4a) motor vehicles controlled and oper¬
ated by any farmer when used in the trans¬
portation of his agricultural (including

horticultural) commodities and products
thereof, or in the transportation of supplies
to his farm; or (5) motor vehicles controlled
and operated by a cooperative association as
defined in sections 1141-1141J of Title 12, as
amended, or by a federation of such cooper¬
ative associations, if such federation pos¬
sesses no greater powers or purposes than
cooperative associations so defined; or (6)
motor vehicles used in carrying property con¬
sisting of ordinary livestock, fish (including
shell fish), or agricultural (including horti¬
cultural) commodities (not including manu¬
factured products thereof), if such motor ve¬
hicles are not used in carrying any other
property, or passengers, for compensation:
Provided, That the words ‘property consisting
of ordinary livestock, fish (including shell
fish), or agricultural (including horticul¬
tural) commodities (not including manufac¬
tured products thereof) * as used herein shall
include property shown as ‘Exempt’ in the
‘Commodity List* incorporated in ruling
numbered 107, March 19, 1958, Bureau of
Motor Carriers, Interstate Commerce Com¬
mission, but shall not include property shown
therein as ‘Not exempt’: Provided further,
however, That notwithstanding the preceding
proviso the words ‘property consisting of or¬
dinary livestock, fish (including shell fish),
or agricultural (Including horticultural)
commodities (not including manufactured
products thereof) ’ shall not be deemed to in¬
clude frozen fruits, frozen berries, frozen
vegetables, cocoa beans, coffee beans, tea,
bananas, or hemp, and wool imported from
any foreign country, wool tops and noils, or
wool waste (carded, spun, woven, or knitted),
and shall be deemed to include cooked or un¬
cooked (including breaded) fish or shell fish
when frozen or fresh (but not including fish
and shell fish which have been treated for
preserving, such as canned, smoked, pickled,
spiced, corned or kippered products); (7)
motor vehicles used exclusively in the distri¬
bution of newspapers; or (7a) the transporta¬
tion of persons or property by motor vehicle
when incidental to transportation by aircraft,
nor, unless and to the extent that the Com¬
mission shall from time to time find that
such application is necessary to carry out the
national transportation policy declared in the
Interstate Commerce Act, shall the provisions
of this part, except the provisions of section
204 of this part relative to qualifications and
maximum hours of service of employees and
safety of operation or standards of equipment
apply to; (8) the transportation of passen¬
gers or property in interstate or foreign com¬
merce wholly within a municipality or be¬
tween contiguous muncipalities or within a
zone adjacent to and commercially a part of
any such municipality or municipalities, ex¬
cept when such transportation is under a
common control, management, or arrange¬
ment for a continuous carriage or shipment
to or from a point without such municipality,
municipalities, or zone, and provided that
the motor carrier engaged in such transpor¬
tation of passengers over regular or irregular
route or routes in interstate commerce is also
lawfully engaged in the intrastate transpor¬
tation of passengers over the entire length
of such interstate route or routes in accord¬
ance with the laws of each State having
jurisdiction; or (9) the casual, occasional, or
reciprocal transportation of passengers or
property by motor vehicle in interstate or
foreign commerce for compensation by any
person not engaged in transportation by mo¬
tor vehicle as a regular occupation or busi¬
ness, unless, in the case of transportation of
passengers, such transportation is sold or of¬
fered for sale, or provided or procured or fur¬
nished or arranged for, by a broker, or by any
other person who sells or offers for sale trans¬
portation furnished by a person lawfully en¬
gaged in the transportation of passengers by
motor vehicle under a certificate or permit
issued under this part or under a pending
application for such a certificate or permit.”

11686

RULES AND REGULATIONS

4. 29 CFR 782.2 (b) and (c) is revised
to read as follows:

§ 782.2 Requirements for exemption in

general.

*****

(b) (1) The exemption is applicable,
under decisions of the United States Su¬
preme Court, to those employees and
those only whose work involves engage¬
ment in activities consisting wholly or
in part of a class of work which is de¬
fined by the Interstate Commerce Com¬
mission (1) as that of a driver, driver’s
helper, loader, or mechanic, and (2) as
directly affecting the safety of operation
of motor vehicles on the public highways
in transportation in interstate or foreign
commerce within the meaning of the
Motor Carrier Act. 17 In determining
whether an employee falls within such
an exempt category, neither the name
given to his position nor that given to the
work that he does is controlling; 18 what
is controlling is the character of the ac¬
tivities involved in the performance of
his job.

(2) As a general rule, if the bona fide
duties of the job performed by the em¬
ployee are in fact such that he is (or,
in the case of a member of a group of
drivers, driver’s helpers, loaders or me¬
chanics employed by a common carrier
and engaged in safety-affecting occupa¬
tions, that he is likely to be) called upon
in the ordinary course of his work to
perform, either regularly or from time
to time, safety-affecting activities of
the character described in subparagraph
(1) of this paragraph, he comes within
the exemption in all workweeks when he
is employed at such job. This general
rule assumes that the activities involved
in the continuing duties of the job in all
such workweeks will include activities
which the Commission has determined
directly affect the safety of operation of
motor vehicles on the public highways in
transportation in interstate commerce.
Where this is the case, the rule applies
regardless of the proportion of the em¬
ployee’s time or of his activities which is
actually devoted to such safety-affecting
work in the particular workweek, and the
exemption will be applicable even in a
workweek when the employee happens to
perform no work directly affecting
“safety of operation.’’ On the other
hand, where the continuing duties of the
employee’s job have no substantial direct
effect on such safety of operation or
where such safety-affecting activities
are so trivial, casual, and insignificant
as to be de minimis, the exemption will
not apply to him in any workweek so
long as there is no change in his duties. 19
If in particular workweeks other duties
are assigned to him which result, in those
workweeks, in his performance of activ¬
ities directly affecting the safety of op¬
eration of motor vehicles in interstate
commerce on the public highways, the
exemption will be applicable to him in
those workweeks, but not in the work¬
weeks when he continues to perform the
duties of the non-safety-affecting job.

(3) Where the same employee of a
carrier is shifted from one job to another
periodically or on occasion, the applica¬
tion of the exemption to him in a particu¬

lar workweek is tested by application of
the above principles to the job or jobs in
which he is employed in that workweek.
Similarly, in the case of an employee of
a private carrier whose job does not re¬
quire him to engage regularly in exempt
safety-affecting activities described in
subparagraph (1) of this paragraph and
whose engagement in such activities oc¬
curs sporadically or occasionally as the
result of his work assignments at a par¬
ticular time, the exemption will apply to
him only in those workweeks when he
engages in such activities. Also, because
the jurisdiction of the Interstate Com¬
merce Commission over private carriers
is limited to carriers of property, 198 a
driver, driver’s helper, loader, or me¬
chanic employed by a private carrier is
not within the exemption in any work¬
week when his safety-affecting activities
relate only to the transportation of pas¬
sengers and not to the transportation of
property.

(1) In a situation considered by the
United States Supreme Court, approxi¬
mately 4 percent of the total trips made
by drivers employed by a common car¬
rier by motor vehicle involved the haul¬
ing of interstate freight. Since it ap¬
peared that the employer, as a common
carrier, was obligated to take such busi¬
ness, and that any driver might be called
upon at any time to perform such work,
which was indiscriminately distributed
among the drivers, the Court considered
that such trips were a natural, integral
and apparently inseparable part of the
common carrier service performed by the
employer and the driver employees.
Under these circumstances, the Court
concluded that such work, which directly
affected the safety of operation of the
vehicles in interstate commerce, brought
the entire classification of drivers em¬
ployed by the carrier under the power
of the Interstate Commerce Commission
to establish qualifications and maximum
hours of service, so that all were exempt
even though the interstate driving of
particular employees was sporadic and
occasional, and in practice some drivers
would not be called upon for long periods
to perform any such work. 20

(2) In another situation, the United
States Court of Appeals (Seventh Cir¬
cuit) recently held that the exemption
would not apply to truck drivers em¬
ployed by a private carrier on intrastate
routes who engaged in no safety-affect¬
ing activities of the character described
above even though other drivers of the
carrier on interstate routes were subject
to the jurisdiction of the Interstate Com¬
merce Commission. The court reaf¬
firmed the principle that the exemption
depends not only upon the class to which
the employer belongs but also the activi¬
ties of the individual employee. 208

5. Footnote 19 to 29 CFR 782.2 is re¬
vised to read as follows:

19 Pyramid Motor Freight Corp. v. Ispass,
330 U.S. 695; Morris v. McComb, 332 U.S. 422;
Levinson v. Spector Motor Service, 330 U.S.
649; Rogers Cartage Co. v. Reynolds, 166 F.
(2d) 317 (C.A. 6); Opelika Bottling Co. v.
Goldberg, 299 F. 2d 37 (C.A. 5); Tobin v.
Mason & Dixon Lines, Inc., 102 F. Supp. 466
(E.D. Tenn.).

6. A new Footnote 19a is added to 29
CFR 782.2 to follow Footnote 19 as fol¬
lows:

19a See footnote 13.

7. A new Footnote 20a is added to 29
CFR 782.2 to follow Footnote 20 as fol¬
lows:

®° a Goldberg v. Faber Industries, 291 F 2d
232.

8. 29 CFR 782.6(c) is revised to read as
follows:

§ 782.6 Mechanics.

(c) (1) An employee of a carrier by
motor vehicle is not exempted as a
“mechanic” from the overtime provi¬
sions of the Fair Labor Standards Act
under section 13(b)(1) merely because
he works in the carrier’s garage, or be¬
cause he is called a “mechanic,” or be¬
cause he is a mechanic by trade and
does mechanical work. The exemption
applies only if he is doing a class of work
defined by the Commission as that of
a “mechanic,” including activities which,
under the Commission’s definitions, di¬
rectly affect the safety of operation of
motor vehicles in transportation on the
public highways in interstate or foreign
commerce. 67 Activities which, according
to the Commission, do not directly af¬
fect such safety of operation include
those performed by employees whose
jobs are confined to such work as that
of dispatchers, carpenters, tarpaulin
tailors, vehicle painters, or service men
who do nothing but oil, gas, grease, or
wash the motor vehicles. 68 To these may
be added activities such as filling radia¬
tors, checking batteries, and the usual
work of such employees as stockroom
personnel, watchmen, porters, and ga¬
rage employees performing menial non¬
discretionary tasks or disassembling
work. Employees whose work is con¬
fined to such “nonsafety” activities are
not within the exemption, 09 even though
the proper performance of their work
may have an indirect effect on the safety
of operation of the motor vehicles on
the highways. 70 The same has been held
true of employees whose activities are
confined to construction work, manu¬
facture or rebuilding of truck, bus, or
trailer bodies, and other duties whicn
are concerned with the safe carriage oi
the contents of the vehicle rather than
directly with the safety of operation o
the public highways of the motor vehici
itself 71

(2) Similarly, the exemption has been
held inapplicable to mechanics repa -
ing and rebuilding parts, batteries, a
tires removed from vehicles where a

rect causal connection between

their

work and the safe operation of mo
vehicles on the highways is lacking
cause they do no actual work on
vehicles themselves and entirely >
ferent employees have the exclu ^ v ^ t h e
sponsibility for determining whether w
products of their work are su j} ,aD . n 0 f
use, and for the correct installati .

such parts, on the vehicles. 7a Meehan^

cal work on motor vehicles of a c
which is performed in order to .
the vehicles conform to technica a c-
requirements rather than to P rev

FEDERAL REGISTER

11687

Friday, November 1, 1963

cidents on the highways has not been
regarded by the courts as work directly
affecting “safety of operation.” 73 And
it is clear that no mechanical work on
motor vehicles can be considered to af¬
fect safety of operation of such vehicles
in interstate or foreign commerce if the
vehicles are never in fact used in trans¬
portation in such commerce on the public
highways. 74

9. Footnote 59 to 29 CFR 782.6 is
revised to read as follows:

M Ex parte Nos. MC-2 and MC-3, 28 M.C.C.
125, 132, 133. Ex parte No. MC-40 (Sub.
No. 2), 88 M.C.C. 710 (repair of refrigeration
equipment). See also Morris v. McComb, 332

U.S. 422.

10. Footnote 67 to 29 CFR 782.6 is
revised to read as follows:

w Morris v. McComb, 332 U.S. 422; Keeling
v. Huber & Huber Motor Express, 57 F. Supp.
617; Walling v. Huber & Huber Motor Ex¬
press, 67 F. Supp. 855; Walling v. Silver Fleet
Motor Express, 67 P. Supp. 846; McDuffie v.
Hayes Freight Lines, 71 P. Supp. 755;
Anuchick v. Transamerican Freight Lines, 46
F. Supp. 861; Walling v. Burlington Transp.
Co. (D. Nebr.), 9 Labor Cases par. 62,576.
Compare Ex parte No. MC-40 (Sub. No. 2),
88 M.C.C. 710 with Colbeck v. Dairyland
Creamery Co. (S.D. Sup. Ct.), 17 N.W. (2d)
262. See also Pyramid Motor Freight Corp.
V.Ispass, 330 U.S. 695.

11. Footnote 71 to 29 CFR 782.6 is

revised to read as follows:

71 Anuchick v. Transamerican Freight Lines,
46 F. Supp. 861; Walling v. Silver Fleet Motor
Express, 67 F. Supp. 846; McDuffie v. Hayes
Freight Lines, 71 F. Supp. 755; Walling v.
Burlington Transp. Co. (D. Nebr.), 9 Labor
Cases, par. 62,576. Compare Colbeck v. Dairy-
iand Creamery Co. (S.D. Sup. Ct.), 17 N.W.
(2d) 262 with Ex parte No. MC-40 (Sub. No.
2), 88 M.C.C. 710.

12. 29 CFR 782.7(b) is revised to read
as follows;

§ 782.7 Interstate commerce require¬
ments of exemption.
*****
(b)(1) Highway transportation by
Pjotor vehicle from one State to another,
t ? tbe course of which the vehicles cross
ne State line, clearly constitutes inter-
ate commerce under both acts. Em-
p yees °f a carrier so engaged, whose
duties directly affect the safety of opera-
n of such vehicles, are within the ex-
^ accor dance with principles
ferfJ? US ^ stated - re T he result is no dif-
crn< c ijfkere the vehicles do not actually
a wi at l lines but operate solely within
Port ph 6 State » what is being trans-
commpvo act ^ ally moving in interstate
acts- W1 , thin th e meaning of both
Port it 1 fact that other carriers trans-

material^ ^ ° r into the State is not
single qL. Transportation within a

within tv? te ls in in terstate commerce
Standard, A m f ea ^ lng of the Fair Labor
"Practical Act lt forms a Part of a
^rossstnt^r° ntlnuit y movement”
to the n<w lin * es from the point of origin
in terstate^ ° f dest ination. 81 Since the
two act*i* 3 ^ lae r ce regulated under the
por tation mo^ 0t lden tical, 82 such trans-
also a rnov?ml . may not he considered
Within thp , ln interstate commerce
Act - Deci<?int anil i g of the Motor Carrier
merce Comm- °* tbe In terstate Com-
°mmissi 0n seemingly have

limited the scope of the Motor Carrier
Act more narrowly than the courts have
construed the Fair Labor Standards Act. 83
It is deemed necessary, however, as an
enforcement policy only and without
prejudice to any rights of employees
under section 16(b) of the Act, to assume
that such a movement in interstate com¬
merce under the Fair Labor Standards
Act is also a movement in interstate
commerce under the Motor Carrier Act,
except in those situations where the In¬
terstate Commerce Commission or the
courts hold otherwise. 84 Under this en¬
forcement policy it will ordinarily be
assumed by the Administrator that the
interstate commerce requirements of the
section 13(b)(1) exemption are satis¬
fied where it appears that a motor
carrier employee is engaged as a
driver, driver’s helper, loader, or me¬
chanic in transportation by motor ve¬
hicle which, although confined to a
single State, is a part of an inter¬
state movement of the goods or persons
being thus transported so as to constitute
interstate commerce within the mean¬
ing of the Fair Labor Standards Act. 83
Where, however, the Interstate Com¬
merce Commission holds that transporta¬
tion of a particular character within a
single State is not in interstate com¬
merce as defined in the Motor Carrier
Act (as it has done with respect to cer¬
tain transportation of petroleum prod¬
ucts from a terminal within a State to
other points within the same State—-see
subparagraph (2) of this paragraph),
there is no basis for an exemption under
section 13(b)(1), even though the facts
may establish a “practical continuity of
movement” from out-of-State sources
through such in-State trip so as to make
the trip one in interstate commerce under
the Fair Labor Standards Act. Of course,
engagement in local transportation
which is entirely in intrastate com¬
merce provides no basis for exempting
a motor carrier employee. 88

(2) The Interstate Commerce Com¬
mission has held that transportation
confined to points in a single State from
a storage terminal of commodities which
have had a prior movement by rail, pipe¬
line, motor or water from an origin in
a different State is not in interstate or
foreign commerce within the meaning
of Part II of the Interstate Commerce
Act if the shipper has no fixed and
persisting transportation intent beyond
the terminal storage point at the time of
shipment. See Ex parte No. MC-48 (71
M.C.C. 17, 29). The Commission has
specifically found that there is no fixed
and persisting intent where (i) at the
time of shipment there is no specific
order being filled for a specific quantity
of a given product to be moved through
to a specific destination beyond the ter¬
minal storage, and (ii) the terminal stor¬
age is a distribution point or local mar¬
keting facility from which specific
amounts of the product are sold or allo¬
cated, and (iii) transportation in the fur¬
therance of this distribution within the
single State is specifically arranged only
after sale or allocation from storage.
While Ex parte No. MC-48 deals with
petroleum and petroleum products, the
determination indicates that the same
reasoning applies to general commodities

moving interstate into a warehouse for
distribution (71 M.C.C. at 27). Accord¬
ingly, employees engaged in such trans¬
portation are not subject to the Motor
Carrier Act and therefore not within
the section 13(b)(1) exemption. They
may, however, be engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the Fair Labor
Standards Act. (See in this connection,
the cases cited in footnote 81; also, Mid-
Continent Petroleum Corp. v. Keen, 157
F. 2d 310 (C.A. 8); DeLoach v. Crowley’s,
Inc., 128 F. 2d 378 (C.A. 5); Walling v.
Jacksonville Paper Co., 69 F. Supp. 599,
affirmed 167 F. 2d 448, reversed on an¬
other point in 336 U.S. 187; and Stand¬
ard Oil Co. v. Trade Commission, 340
U.S. 231, 238).

13. Footnote 84 to 29 CFR 782.7' is
revised to read as follows:

*****

84 See § 782.8(a); and compare Beggs v.
Kroger Co., 167 F. 2d 700, with the Com¬
mission’s holding in Ex parte No. MC-48, 71
M.C.C. 17, discussed in paragraph (b) (2)
of this section.

(52 Stat. 1060 et seq., as amended; 29 U.S.C.
201 et seq.)

Signed at Washington, D.C., this 29th
day of October 1963.

Clarence T. Lundquist,

Administrator .

[F.R. Doc. 63-11571; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;

8:47 a.m.]

PART 794—WHOLESALE OR BULK
DISTRIBUTION OF PETROLEUM
PRODUCTS BY CERTAIN ENTER¬
PRISES; EMPLOYMENT EXEMPT
FROM OVERTIME PAY REQUIRE¬
MENTS OF THE FAIR LABOR STAND¬
ARDS ACT UNDER SECTION
13(b)(10)

Miscellaneous Amendments

Pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards
Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.), Re¬
organization Plan No. 6 of 1950 (3 CFR
1949-53 Comp., p. 1004), and General
Order No. 45-A of the Secretary of Labor
(15 F.R. 3290), I hereby revise 29 CFR
794.104, 29 CFR 794.149, and 29 CFR
794.150 to read as set forth below.

The provisions of section 4 of the Ad¬
ministrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C.
1003) which require notice of proposed
rule making, opportunity for public par¬
ticipation, and delay in effective date are
not applicable because these are inter¬
pretative rules. I do not believe such
participation will serve a useful purpose
here. Accordingly, these amendments
shall become effective immediately.

§ 794.104 Enterprises engaged in de¬
scribed distribution and in other ac¬
tivities.

An enterprise may be engaged in the
wholesale or bulk distribution of pe¬
troleum products, within the meaning of
section 13(b) (10), without being ex¬
clusively so engaged. Such engagement
may be only one of the several related
activities, performed through unified
operation or common control for a com¬
mon business purpose, which constitute
the enterprise under section 3(r) of the

11688

RULES AND REGULATIONS

Act. If engaging in such distribution is
a regular and significant part of its busi¬
ness, an enterprise which meets the other
tests for exemption under section 13(b)
(10) will be relieved of overtime pay
obligations with respect to employment
of its employees in such distribution ac¬
tivities, in accordance with the intended
scope (see § 794.101) of the exemption.
The same will be true with respect to
employment of its employees in those
related activities which are customarily
performed as an incident to or in con¬
junction with the wholesale or bulk dis¬
tribution of petroleum products in the
enterprises of the industry engaged in
such distribution. There is no require¬
ment that engaging in such activities
constitute any particular percentage of
the enterprise’s business. However, in
the case of an enterprise engaged in
other activities as well as in the wholesale
or bulk distribution of petroleum prod¬
ucts including related activities cus¬
tomarily performed in the enterprises of
the industry as an incident thereto or
in conjunction therewith, an employee
employed in such other activities of the
enterprise is not engaged in employment
which the exemption was intended to
reach (see § 794.101). Such an employee
is not brought within the exemption by
virtue of the fact that the enterprise by
which he is employed is engaged with
other employees in the distribution ac¬
tivities described in section 13(b) (10).
This accords with the judicial construc¬
tion of other exemptons in the Act which
are similarly worded. See Connecticut
Co. v. Walling, 154 F. 2d 522, certiorari
denied, 329 U.S. 667; Northwest Airlines
v. Jackson, 185 F. 2d 74; Davis v. Good¬
man Lumber Co., 133 F. 2d 52; Flemming
v. Swift & Co., 41 F. Supp. 825, aff’d 131
F. 2d 249.

§ 794.149 Employees who are exempt.

Section 13(b) (10) provides that the
exemption from the overtime require¬
ments of the Act shall be applicable to
‘‘any employee of” a distribution enter¬
prise which meets its requirements. This
means to all the employees of such en¬
terprise who are engaged in the storage
and delivery of petroleum products for
the enterprise, and to those employees
whose work is required for the perform¬
ance of the activities in the wholesale or
bulk distribution of the petroleum prod¬
ucts or the related activities customarily
performed as an incident to or in con¬
junction with such distribution in the
enterprises of the industry which
distributes such products. The exemp¬
tion is applicable not only to such em¬
ployees as drivers, helpers, loaders, dis¬
patchers, and warehousemen engaged in
the bulk delivery and storage of petro¬
leum products, but also to such employ¬
ees as office, management, and sales
personnel, maintenance, custodial, pro¬
tective personnel, and any others, who
engage in related functions customarily
carried on by such enterprises in the in¬
dustry in conjunction with the wholesale
and bulk distribution of the petroleum
products.

§ 794.150 Effect of activities other than
“wholesale or bulk distribution of
petroleum products”.

As previously noted, in some cases the
related activities performed through uni¬
fied operation or common control for a
common business purpose which are in¬
clude activities other than the wholesale
nition in section 3(r) of the Act may in¬
clude activities other than the wholesale
or bulk distribution of petroleum prod¬
ucts. Examples are tire recapping or
gasoline station services, the sale and
servicing of oil burners, or the distri¬
bution of coal, ice, feed, building sup¬
plies, paint, etc. In some instances, as
in the case of oil burner servicing, these
other activities are customarily per¬
formed as an incident to or in conjunc¬
tion with the wholesale or bulk distribu¬
tion of petroleum products in the enter¬
prises of the industry engaged in such
distribution. As indicated in § 794.104,
employees of the enterprise who engage
in such activities are within the scope
of the exemption. However, activities
which are not customary practices of
enterprises in the industry of wholesale
or bulk distribution of petroleum prod¬
ucts are not within the scope of the in¬
tent of the section 13(b) (10) exemption.
For example, construction activities, op¬
eration of a sporting goods store, scrap
paper and metal activities, the operation
of a general repair garage, etc., are not
the type of activities for which the sec¬
tion 13(b) (10) exemption was intended.
Thus, where an enterprise engaged in the
wholesale or bulk distribution of pe¬
troleum products operates a general re¬
pair garage, a mechanic servicing the
automobiles and trucks brought to the
garage by customers will not for that
reason be within the exemption provided
by section 13(b) (10), although the ex¬
emption provided by section 13(a)(2)
may apply to him if the garage qualifies
as an exempt retail or service establish¬
ment under the tests provided in that
section of the Act. On the other hand,
mechanics employed by an enterprise
engaged in the wholesale or bulk distri¬
bution of petroleum products for the
purpose of keeping the distribution
equipment of the enterprise in good re¬
pair would come within the 13(b) (10)
exemption. In each case where an em¬
ployee of the enterprise is engaged for
a substantial portion of his workweek
in activities which do not appear to be
a part of the wholesale or bulk distri¬
bution of petroleum products, it will
therefore be necessary to examine such
activities and the manner and extent
of their performance to determine
whether they are included in or are
foreign to the activities customarily per¬
formed as an incident to or in conjunc¬
tion with such distribution in the enter¬
prises of the industry which distributes
such products. Where an employee, who
is otherwise engaged in exempt activities
(the wholesale or bulk distribution of
petroleum products, including activities
which are a necessary part thereof, and
in activities customarily performed in
the enterprises of the industry as an in¬

cident thereto or in conjunction there¬
with), devotes an insubstantial amount
of time (for administrative purposes, not
more than 20 percent in a workweek) to
these foreign activities, the section 13(b)
(10) exemption will not for that reason
be considered inapplicable to him.

(52 Stat. 1060 et seq. as amended; 29 U.S.C.
201 et seq.)

Signed at Washington, D.C., this 29th
day of October 1963.

Clarence T. Lundquist,
Administrator,

[F.R. Doc. 63-11573; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;
8:47 a.m.]

Title 32— NATIONAL DEFENSE

Chapter I—Office of the Secretary of
Defense

SUBCHAPTER M—MISCELLANEOUS

PART 270—PROCESSING UNIT PRO¬
POSALS OF EMPLOYEE ORGANIZA¬
TIONS FOR EXCLUSIVE RECOGNI¬
TION PURPOSES

The Deputy Secretary of Defense ap¬
proved the following October 15, 1963:

Sec.

270.1 Purpose.

270.2 Applicability.

270.3 Definition.

270.4 Action on unit proposals.

270.5 Requests for nomination of arbi¬

trators.

270.6 Effective date and implementation.

Authority: §§ 270.1 to 270.6 issued under
sec. 11, E.O. 10988, 27 F.R. 555.

§ 270.1 Purpose.

This part establishes time limits on
certain actions with respect to the es¬
tablishment within the Department of
Defense of appropriate units for the pur¬
pose of exclusive recognition and imple¬
ments the Secretary of Labor’s “Rules
for the Nomination of Arbitrators Under
Section 11 of Executive Order 10988 U#
F.R. 9941).

§ 270.2 Applicability.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph
(b) of this section this part is apphcao
to all components of the Department
Defense (Military Departments, Deien
Agencies, and the Office of the Sec
tary of Defense), hereinafter referred
as “DOD Components”.

(b) This part does not apply to tnos
DOD components or parts th e reo
which, pursuant to section H 1 or
partment of Defense Directive H •
May 15, 1962, the provisions of hxet
tive Order 10988 do not apply.

r0.3 Definition.

s used in this part “installation^
les any organizational entity, a
ital or field, the head of which iW
responsibility for making tnes
jrmination as to the appropi < ,

nvnnACoH unif. fnr PXClUSlVe f

FEDERAL REGISTER

Friday, November 1, 1963

11689

§ 270.4 Action on unit proposals.

(a) Employee organization officials are
encouraged to discuss informally with
appropriate DOD officials contemplated
proposals for the establishment of units
for purposes of exclusive recognition, be¬
fore such proposals are formally sub¬
mitted in writing. DOD officials will
participate in such discussions at the
request of employee organizations and
will also confer informally with any other
employee organizations known to have
an interest in the proposal. To the ex¬
tent that such informal discussions result
in understanding and agreement among
the parties there will be less likelihood
that advisory arbitration procedures
under section 11 of Executive Order 10983
will be necessary.

(b) Formal proposals for the estab¬
lishment of appropriate units for exclu¬
sive recognition purposes will be sub¬
mitted in writing and must comply with
the requirements of section V. B of DOD
Directive 1426.1, May 15, 1962. Deci¬
sions on such proposals must be made
without undue delay, since no election is
to be scheduled or held for the purpose
of determining eligibility for exclusive
recognition nor will exclusive recogni¬
tion be accorded an employee organiza¬
tion on any other basis until the deci¬
sion on the unit is finalized. In con¬
sidering proposals for the establishment
of units the views of all interested em¬
ployee organizations will be taken into
account.

(c) When an employee organization
formally requests exclusive recognition
m a unit which it proposes as appropri¬
ate, the following actions will be taken:

employee organizations having
eceived or known to be seeking recogni¬
tion (informal, formal, or exclusive) at
e installation will be notified, in writ-
ng, of the proposal and advised that
1 \ ave 15 calendar days after the
if? the notice in which to register
vi*n bead installation any

IS? 35 ^ the proposed unit. Each
vi^oH ^ gan ization will be further ad-
maiiv fv. at> ? *t wishes to propose for-
^tablishment of a unit which
but Sm!? 1 . tbe unit or iginally proposed
unit Cludes a Potion of that

tZrpL WlU be expe °ted to comply with
S^JS^^nts of section V B of DOD
^rectiv e 1426.1, May 15, 1962, with re-

the unit re £r^ en tation of employees in
w ]nch it proposes.

req U red\v L S ^ e date of the notices
§ 2 7°.4 ( C > (l), notice of the

Priate h?, 1 WlU be posted on appro-
I £ b ° ardS at the installation,

I limit (is J ltb a sta tement of the time
I within thipvf after the date of Posting)
Posals bv V eWS 0r formal unit pro-
be submitt ^ loyee organizations must
[ lation tted 10 the head of the instal-

lat er than D ^n mP ? y as P ossib le, but not
ration of the i ( l al . endar da ys after expi-
in time ltmit specified

section, the ho (1) and (2) » of this

make hk doo- ad °* ^ be installation will
ness of the J!° n 35 to the a PPropriate-
^nsideratinn P° sed un it or units, giving
em Ployee Vlews expressed by all
gamzations which have

commented. To the fullest practicable
extent, informal discussions will be held
with those employee organizations which
formally proposed the establishment of
a unit and complied with the require¬
ments of section V B of DOD Directive
1426.1, May 15, 1962. That decision and
the reasons therefor will be communi¬
cated, in writing, to the head of each
employee organization which com¬
mented. Each organization which for¬
mally proposed the establishment of a
unit and complied withe requirements
of section V B of DOD Directive 1426.1,
May 15, 1962 will, if the decision differs
from its proposal, be notified that it has
15 calendar days after the date of such
notification to appeal to the head of the
appropriate Department of Defense
component.

(e) An employee organization which
has made a formal unit proposal which
complied with the requirements of this
part and which has not received advice
from the head of the installation after
the expiration of 45 days following the
date of the posting of the notice re¬
quired by paragraph (c) (2) of this sec¬
tion, may assume that the decision of
the head of the installation is contrary
to its proposal and appeal as provided
in paragraph (f) of this section.

(f) Appeals from unit determinations
made by the head of an installation will
be in writing, will be addressed to the
head of the appropriate DOD compo¬
nent, will contain a statement of the rea¬
sons for disagreeing with the unit de¬
termination, will be accompanied by
any documents relied upon by the or¬
ganization to support its position, and
will be signed by the head of the appeal¬
ing organization. In the interest of
conserving time, such appeals should
be filed with the head of the installa¬
tion whose determination is being ap¬
pealed. The installation head will at¬
tach all pertinent documents required
to support his determination and he and
all intermediate officials through whom
such appeals must pass will assure that
they are forwarded without delay to the
head of the DOD component, or to the
Official designated by him to handle
such matters.

(g) The decision of the head of a
DOD component on an appeal from a
unit determination will be made within
15 calendar days from the date the ap¬
peal is filed and will be communicated
in writing to the head of the employee
organization involved. When the de¬
cision has not been received after the
expiration of this period the employee
organization may assume that the de¬
cision is contrary to its proposal.

(h) Failure of an employee organi¬
zation to comply with the time limits
herein established will bar such organi¬
zation, for a period of 12 months, from
proposing future units only when the
proposal covers in whole or in part the
unit proposal which caused the time
limits to begin to run and:

(1) That unit proposal resulted in a
proceeding under section 11 of Executive
Order 10988 or a determination of ex¬
clusive status; or

(2) The organization would be barred
under 29 CFR 25.3(c) (3) (28 F.R. 9941)

from making a timely request for the
appointment of an arbitrator.

(i) Whenever a party has the right or
is required to do some act or take some
other proceedings under this part within
a prescribed time period after service of a
notice or other paper upon the party,
and the notice or other paper is served
upon him by mail, three days shall be
added to the prescribed time period.

§ 270.5 Requests for nomination of ar¬
bitrators.

Requests on behalf of the Department
of Defense for the nomination of arbitra¬
tors will be made by the head of the
DOD component concerned, or by the
official designated by him for this pur¬
pose. Such requests will be made on the
forms prescribed by the Secretary of
Labor and will comply with all the re¬
quirements of the Secretary of Labor’s
“Rules for the Nomination of Arbitrators
Under section 11 of Executive Order
10988” (28 F.R. 9941). Joint requests
with employee organizations are encour¬
aged.

§ 270.6 Effective date and implementa¬
tion.

This part is effective October 15, 1963.
Two (2) copies of implementing regula¬
tions will be provided to the Assistant
Secretary of Defense (Manpower) within
thirty (30) days.

Maurice W. Roche,
Administrative Secretary .

[F.R. Doc. 63-11548; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;

8:45 a.m.]

Title 41—PUBLIC CONTRACTS

Chapter 5—General Services
Administration

PART 5-60—CONTRACT APPEALS

Subpart 5-60.2—Rules of the General
Services Administration Board of
Contract Appeals

Miscellaneous Amendments

1. Section 5-60.201 Notice of appeal
(28 F.R. 1770) is revised to read as fol¬
lows:

§ 5—60.201 Notice of appeal.

§ 5-60.201-1 Filing.

A notice of appeal must be in writing,
should be addressed to the Administrator
of General Services, and mailed or other¬
wise furnished to the contracting officer.
However, where the appeal is addressed
to the contracting officer from whose
decision the appeal is taken, or the head
of the constituent General Services Ad¬
ministration organization, upon referral,
the Board will proceed as though the ap¬
peal had been made to the Administra¬
tor. The notice of appeal must be mailed
or otherwise filed within the time speci¬
fied therefor in the contract, or as al¬
lowed in applicable provisions of direc¬
tives or law.

§ 5—60.201—2 Acknowledgment and dis¬
tribution.

After the Board receives the notice of
appeal, it will promptly acknowledge re-

11690

RULES AND REGULATIONS

ceipt thereof to the appellant. The
Board simultaneously will furnish copies
of the appeal and acknowledgment to
the contracting officer, the GSA Central
Office service or staff office concerned,
and the appropriate representative of
the Office of General Counsel.

2. Section 5-60.204 Preparation of
the appeal file (28 F.R. 1770) is revised
to read as follows:

§ 5—60.204 Appeal file.

§ 5-60.204-1 Request, preparation, and
submission.

When furnishing the contracting
officer with a copy of the notice of appeal
(§ 5-60.201-2), the Board will request
him to prepare an appeal file for submis¬
sion to the Board, within 30 days after
receipt of the request, through the
Central Office service or staff office con¬
cerned and the Office of General Counsel
(other than trial counsel).

§ 5-60.204-2 Documents and index.

(a) The appeal file should include the
originals or copies of all documents
pertinent to the appeal, together with
an index listing the documents. There
should be included:

(1) The decision from which the ap¬
peal is taken, including any findings of
fact made in connection therewith.

(2) The invitation for bids, the con¬
tract, pertinent plans, specifications,
amendments, and change orders.

(3) Correspondence between the
parties.

(4) Transcripts of any testimony
taken during the course of any proceed¬
ings conducted on the dispute prior to
the filing of the appeal.

(5) Such additional information as
may be considered material.

(6) A statement of the position relied
on by the Government with regards to
the issues presented by the appeal.

(b) A copy of the index fisting the
documents in the appeal file shall be
furnished the appellant by the Board
when the appeal file is received.

§ 5—60.204—3 Availability.

The appeal file will be available for
inspection by the parties or their repre¬
sentatives at the Board’s offices. A
duplicate appeal file will also be available
for such inspection at the office of the
contracting officer in the regional office.
The contracting officer will notify the
Board whenever the appellant makes in¬
spection of his appeal file, furnishing
dates, names, and other relevant in¬
formation.

§ 5-60.204r-4 Copies.

Arrangements can be made to furnish
an appellant with desired copies of mate¬
rial in the appeal file upon payment of
the cost involved. Authority to authen¬
ticate or attest such copies is vested in
the GSA General Counsel to whom re¬
quests for such service should be ad¬
dressed, with a copy of the request to be
furnished the Board.

Effective date . These regulations are
effective upon publication in the Federal
Register.

(Sec. 205(c), 63 Stat. 390; 40 U.S.C. 486(c))
Dated: October 25,1963.

Bernard L. Boutin,
Administrator of
General Services .

[PR. Doc. 63-11565; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;
8:46 ajn.]

Chapter 8—Veterans Administration

PART 8-2—PROCUREMENT BY
FORMAL ADVERTISING

Subpart 8-2.1—Use of Formal
Advertising

Subpart 8-2.4—Opening of Bids and
Award of Contract

PART 8-3—PROCUREMENT BY
NEGOTIATION

Subpart 8-3.4—Types of Contracts

Miscellaneous Amendments

1. In Part 8-2, § 8-2.104-1 is revoked.
§ 8—2.104—1 General. [Revoked]

2. Section 8-2.104-3 is revised to read
as follows:

§ 8-2.104—3 Fixed price contracts with
escalation.

When contracts of this nature are au¬
thorized (by Central Office) pursuant
to § 8-3.402, contracting officers will be
guided by the provisions of FPR
1-3.403-2.

3. Section 8-2.404-2 is revised to read
as follows:

§ 8-2.404—2 Rejection of individual
bids.

(a) Questions involving the respon¬
siveness of a bid which cannot be re¬
solved by the contracting officer may be
submitted directly to the Comptroller
General, accompanied by a copy of each
of the pertinent documents. A copy of
each such submission will be forwarded
to the Director, Supply Management
Service.

(b) Bids from employees of the Gov¬
ernment will generally be disregarded
except where bid invitations have been
solicited from several prospective bidders
and the bid of the employee is the only
one received. In such instances the con¬
tracting officer may award the contract
to the employee only after he has made
a written determination, which shall
be included in and made a part of the
contract file:

(1) That the procurement from such
source is necessary to meet the require¬
ments and the reasons why the award of
the contract to the employee is advan¬
tageous to the Government; and

(2) That there is not, nor will there
be a conflict of interest or potential con¬
flict of interest in the performance of
such contract by the employee.

4. In Part 8-3, § 8-3.402 is aded to read
as follows:

§ 8—3.402 Selection of contract type.

(a) Contracts for supplies or non¬
personal services awarded pursuant to
Part 8-2 or this part shall be of the fol¬
lowing types:

(1) Firm fixed price for a period of
one (1) year or less.

(2) Firm fixed price for periods in
excess of one (1) year but not exceeding
three (3) years.

(3) Fixed price with an escalation
clause. (See FPR 1-3.403-2.)

(b) When in the opinion of the con¬
tracting officer it would be advantageous
to the Veterans Administration to award
a contract of the type specified in para¬
graph (a) (2) or (3) of this section, the
reasons therefor shall be submitted to
the appropriate Central Office depart¬
ment or staff office for approval, prior
to issuance of the Request for Proposal
or Invitation for Bid. Public utilities
contracts containing an escalation clause
may be entered into without prior
approval.

(c) If a contract is made for a period
which extends beyond the appropriation
of the year in which the contract period
begins, a statement shall be incorporated
in the contract to the effect that it is
made for a period of time covered by the
contract, subject to the availability of
appropriations.

(72 Stat. 1114, sec. 205(c), 63 Stat. 390; 38
U.S.C. 210, 40 U.S.C. 486(C))

These regulations are effective im¬
mediately.

Approved: October 28, 1963.

By direction of the Administrator.

[seal] A. H. Monk,

Associate Deputy Administrator .

[P.R. Doc. 63-11558; Piled, Oct. 31,

8:46 a.m.]

Title 47—TELECOMMUNICATION

Chapter I—Federal Communications
Commission
[Docket No. FCC 63-976]

PART 3—RADIO BROADCAST
SERVICES

ALLOCATION AND TECHNKM
STANDARDS AND FM UNLIMITED,
INC.

Memorandum Opinion and Order

In the matter of revision of ^ br °$jn
cast rules, particularly as to a ^
and technical standards, pop
14185; petition of FM Unhmitea,
for changes in FM Station As °
Rules, RM-94, RM-472, 482, 4 f ’ e jt a
1. The Commission has Deioi
number of Petitions for R ^ c _ 01 \ nran duifl
of the “Third Report, Memora

Friday, November 1, 1963

FEDERAL REGISTER

11691

Opinion and Order” issued in this pro¬
ceeding on August 1, 1963 (FCC 63-735),
and published in the Federal Register
on August 8, 1963, (28 F.R. 8077). 1 On
our own motion, we are concurrently
reconsidering several other miscellane¬
ous matters pertaining to the new FM
Table of Assignments adopted as
§ 3.202(b) of the Commission’s rules.
As a result of the various petitions and
of reconsideration on our own motion
in other instances, we are adding, delet¬
ing, or changing at least one FM chan¬
nel assignment in approximately forty
communities. The net effect of the ad¬
ditions, deletions, and changes has been
to leave the number of assignments in
the Table almost unchanged.

2. The Petitions for Reconsideration
may be divided roughly into the follow¬
ing categories:

(a) Unopposed requests to add, delete,
or change new channel assignments
made in the “Third Report”.

(b) Unopposed requests to make
changes in the Table of Assignments
which would also involve the modifica¬
tion of existing licenses or construction
permits.

(d) One petition raising the problem
of second harmonic interference from
certain FM assignments to high band
VHP television reception.

In the paragraphs to follow, we con¬
sider each of the petitions within the
general framework set out above.

Unopposed requests to add, delete, or
change channels } 3. We are granting
the following unopposed requests to add
or change channel assignments:

(a) South Central Kentucky Broad-
oasting Co., Inc. requests the assignment
pi Channel 272A to Munfordville, Ken¬
tucky. South Central submits that the
!f!f n j nent is technically feasible and
eea e d to provide primary nighttime
fMtr 0 the area around Munfordville.
.? udson Broadcasting Corpora-
5o^u Censee of Station WCMB(AM),
m Jv^urg, Pennsylvania, seeks assign-
ment of an additional FM channel for

Were^iw °* tbe P etitions considered here
making f 0rm ’ petitloiIS requesting new rule
rules V i amendment of § 3.202(b) of the
merits Sh^p d< L neW ° r chan 8ed assign-
within thi ? these Petitions were filed
re considemf timC period for petitions for

the ot ^ and since they diff er from

in. their rnrS? titions consider ed here only
,,r ule-maSl? ns ' we are treating the three
consideratiJ? requests as petitions for re¬
petitions fnr ° n the other hand, three
I timely fiipri Q reconsideration which were
I time/ Th^p bein & considered at this

Broadcasters'^ 0115 Were med by Illlana
I •JeromeR'wf 1 5 c > Eclwa rd W. Piszczek

I ® r °adcasttnK ' S) 6St T rflel<1 ’ and ^ olntIy ) Gale

I Valley. ln . s Inc. and Radio Skokie
Inflicting a «j?if, heSe petit ions all propose
,he Chicag 0 a “'L Dmeata of Channel 294 in
I unresolved , Because several current

| 8 n involvfng nft lngS before the Commis-
[Chieago area ° tber FM channels in the
Incision regaS, Wghly relevant to our
I erving judgment c bannel 294, we are re-
IWediate future ° n thiS question for the

|changes th or deTJtion 11 that follows > a ^Y
I parti cuiar chann^ necessar Y to assign
nnel are specifically noted.

that city. Hudson points out that Har¬
risburg itself has a population of 79,697,
that the population of the metropolitan
area is now 69th among SMSA’s, and
that no vacant assignments have been
provided Harrisburg in the Table. By
changing assignments in several other
cities, Hudson urges, Channel 257A may
be assigned to Harrisburg without any
reduction in the number of assignments
available elsewhere. Under this plan,
221A would be substituted for 237A at
Lock Haven, and 237A for 257A at
Shamokin. The site of any station using
257A at Shamokin would have to be about
three miles out of the city.

(c) Pocono Broadcasting, Inc., li¬
censee of WVPO(AM), Stroudsburg,
Pennsylvania, requests that Channel
228A be substituted for 292A at Strouds¬
burg. Pocono seeks to construct an FM
station using a transmitter site at Totts
Gap. Channel 228A would meet all spac-
ings at this location while 292A would
not.

(d) Valley Hi Broadcasting Corpora¬
tion requests that additional Channel
287 be assigned to Evansville, Indiana.
It is urged that Evansville, a city with
a population of 141,543, needs a second
competitive FM service and that Chan¬
nel 287 may be assigned in full conform¬
ance with the rules.

(e) Booth Broadcasting Company, li¬
censee of WIOU(AM), Kokomo, Indiana,
seeks to have Channel 228A assigned to
Kokomo, either in place of or in addition
to the present assignment of Channel
232A. Booth submits that it is anxious
to construct an FM station, that in order
to render this economically feasible it
is proposing to use the site of its stand¬
ard broadcast station, that this site falls
four miles short of one of the spacing
requirements, and that Channel 228A
would meet all requirements.

(f) Carolina Radio of Durham, Inc.,
licensee of Station WSRC(AM), Durham,
North Carolina, requests that Channel
296A be assigned to Durham. Carolina
urges that Durham, a city of 78,302, now
has only one FM assignment—which is
in use—and that Channel 296A may be
added in full conformance with all rules.

4. We have studied each of the pro¬
posals in the preceding paragraph and
have found that all technical require¬
ments of the rules can be met in each
case. On the basis of the unopposed
submissions before us, we conclude that
each of the requests is meritorious and
should be granted. (In Kokomo, Indi¬
ana, we are adopting the second alterna¬
tive proposed by Booth Broadcasting
Company—i.e., we are assigning Chan¬
nel 228A in place of, and not in addition
to, Channel 232A).

5. The Audio House, Inc., licensee of
KRPM (FM), San Jose, California, re¬
quests that we rescind the actions assign¬
ing Channel 289 to Santa Clara, Cali¬
fornia, and modifying the construction
permit of Station KREP (FM), Santa
Clara, to specify operation on Channel
289 in lieu of Channel 277. This action
was taken to relieve an extreme shortage
between KREP and a co-channel station,
KBEE-FM at Modesto, only 46.5 miles
away. See Paragraph 29 (a) of the Third
Report. Audio House argues that it has
attempted to increase its facilities over

a number of years, that it had applied
for Channel 289, and that as a result
of this action it cannot obtain adequate
power. It asks, in the event that its
request is denied, that the Commission
entertain an application for 14.5 kw and
863 foot antenna height on its present
channel. Station KRPM is presently
authorized to operate with 3.4 kw and
370 foot antenna height. It is presently
off the air. With regard to the assign¬
ment of Channel 289 we hereby reaffirm
our earlier decision that the assignment
should go to Santa Clara rather than
San Jose. While San Jose is the larger
of the two cities, 204,196 as against
58,880, it has 4 assignments while Santa
Clara has only one. It therefore appears
to us that there is more merit in allow¬
ing the sole station in Santa Clara to
obtain an assignment which would per¬
mit the maximum facilities for the class
of station, than one of the four San Jose
stations. Moreover, the short-spacing
problems of Station KREP at Santa
Clara (on 277) were considerably greater
than those of KRPM on its present chan¬
nel. We therefore deny the request of
Audio House for reversal of this decision.
With respect to its alternative request,
the matter of increased facilities for ex¬
isting stations at spacings below the
adopted minimums is still before us and
we except to commence a rule making
proceeding on this question shortly.

6. Pacifica Foundation, licensee of
Station KPFA(FM), Berkeley, Cali¬
fornia, points out in its petition that the
assignment of Channel 232A to Tracy,
California, is short-spaced to KPFA on
adjacent Channel 231. We agree that
this assignment was erroneous under the
rules and we are, therefore, assigning
Channel 265A to Tracy in lieu of 232A.
It will be necessary for any applicant for
this new frequency at Tracy to locate its
transmitter about three miles outside of
the community to meet the required
spacings.

7. Joseph L. Lepp, Inc., applicant for
a new FM station in Columbia, Illinois,
requests reconsideration of the Third
Report insofar as it did not assign a Class
A channel to this community. Lepp sub¬
mits that there is a large rural area sur¬
rounding Columbia, that it has expended
efforts over the past two years in order
to obtain an FM authorization, and that
it is willing to apply for any Class A as¬
signment the Commission makes to this
community. Columbia is a community
of 3,174 persons and is located just south
of the St. Louis, Missouri urbanized area.
The only additional Class A channel
which was available to this area in con¬
formance with the rules (Channel 285A)
was assigned to Granite City, Illinois, a
city of 40,000 population. Under the
“twenty-five mile rule” (§ 3.203(b) of the
Commission’s rules), it was possible for
Lepp to apply for the Granite City chan¬
nel at Columbia. Lepp has filed such an
application and, on October 10, 1963, the
application was granted. Lepp’s petition
for reconsideration is therefore rendered
moot and will be dismissed.

Unopposed requests involving license
modifications. 8. Simon Geller, permit¬
tee of WVCA-FM, Gloucester, Massa¬
chusetts, requests that Channel 285A be
substituted for 228A at Gloucester and

11692

RULES AND REGULATIONS

that the construction permit for WVCA-
PM be modified accordingly. On Chan¬
nel 228A, WVCA-FM is short-spaced ap¬
proximately 40 miles to a first adjacent
channel station at Lawrence and 7 miles
short-spaced to a third adjacent chan¬
nel station in Brookline. Geller urges
that the proposed change would permit
increased facilities and coverage for his
station and would meet all spacing re¬
quirements except for a three mile short¬
age to adjacent channel Station WFGM
on Channel 284 at Fitchburg, Massa¬
chusetts. This shortage may be elimi¬
nated, Geller states, by modifying the
license of Station WFGM to specify op¬
eration on Channel 283 rather than
284—a change which would also elimi¬
nate another short-spacing problem for
WFGM. By letter submitted October 23,
1963, the licensee of WFGM has agreed to
this modification of its license. We are
of the view that the proposed changes
are in the public interest in that they
would permit both stations to eliminate
short-spacing problems and thus remove
all bars to power increases to maximum
permissible facilities for each of the sta¬
tions. Accordingly, we are modifying the
permit of WVCA-FM and the license of
WFGM-FM as requested by Geller.

9. Meadowcraft Broadcasting, Inc., li¬
censee of Station WHFI(FM), Birming¬
ham, Michigan, has submitted a plan
whereby WHFI would exchange chan¬
nels with WQRS-FM, Detroit, and each
station would change location. WHFI
would change frequency from Channel
234 to 286 and location from Birming¬
ham, Michigan, to Pontiac, Michigan;
WQRS-FM would change frequency
from Channel 286 to 234 and location
from Detroit, Michigan, to Birmingham
or Troy, Michigan. Effectuation of this
plan would require amendment of the
Table of Assignments and modification
of the license of each station. Although
Meadowcraft, licensee of WHFI, desires
the frequency change and change of sta¬
tion location, the licensee of WQRS-FM
has stated that it will not consent to a
change in its station location from De¬
troit to Birmingham or Troy. Under
these circumstances, we will deny the
Meadowcraft petition at the present
time. We feel that an extremely strong
public interest showing is necessary in
order to justify an involuntary modifica¬
tion of an existing station license. In
the present case, no short-spacing prob¬
lems would be eliminated or improved by
the proposed frequency changes (though
no short-spacing problems would be
made worse). Pontiac would gain a first
local FM station and Detroit would lose
one FM station. Although we do not
foreclose possible future action with re¬
gard to this proposal—should the li¬
censees reach some mutually agreeable
plan—we do not believe that involuntary
modification of the WQRS-FM license is
justified at this time.

10. Contemporary Radio, Inc., licensee
of Station WAYL(FM), Minneapolis,
Minnesota, requests that its license be
modified to specify operation on Chan¬
nel 233 rather than its present channel,

241, allowing the latter channel to be
used elsewhere in the Table. Contem¬
porary submits that it supported the as¬
signment of Channel 233 to Minneapolis
in its original comments and that in
those comments it also meant to be un¬
derstood as requesting modification of
the WAYL license to specify Channel
233. It is urged that this modification
be made now, in view of the misunder¬
standing as to Contemporary’s position
in the original proceeding. WAYL is
short-spaced on its present channel and,
in addition to its petition considered
here, Contemporary has filed an appli¬
cation to change frequency from Chan¬
nel 241 to Channel 233. However, an¬
other application for a new station on
Channel 233 at Minneapolis has recently
been tendered by Hubbard Broadcasting,
Inc. For this reason, we are unable to
grant the WAYL request at the present
time. The WAYL request for Channel
233 must undergo comparative consid¬
eration with that of Hubbard Broad¬
casting, Inc. If the WAYL application
for Channel 233 should eventually be
granted, it is our intention to delete
Channel 241 from the Table at Minne¬
apolis and to use this channel, or an
adjacent channel elsewhere in the Table
at proper spacings.

Conflicting requests for additions, de¬
letions, or changes. 11. James T. Bar-
low, of Plainfield, Indiana, requests that
Channel 252A be assigned to that city.
All required mileage separations would
be met and no other changes in the Table
would be required. This proposal con¬
flicts with one of three alternative re¬
quests submitted by Howell Phillips,
licensee of WIFN-FM on Channel 240A
at Franklin, Indiana. Phillips seeks to
relieve the shortage which that station
now has with WFMS in Indianapolis on
Channel 238 or to otherwise obtain an
increase in facilities of WIFN (FM).
The first alternative proposal would be
to assign Channel 242 to Franklin as a
“Class A” assignment. This would
amount to no more than a very short¬
spaced Class B assignment since the
spacing from Franklin to Richmond,
where Channel 241 is assigned, is ap¬
proximately 40 miles short of the re¬
quired 105 miles. Thus, we must reject
this alternative. The second alterna¬
tive—which conflicts with the Barlow
request for Plainfield—would assign
Channel 252A to Franklin, Channel 244A
to Plainfield, and substitute Channel 247
for 246 at Shelbyville. Neither of the
proposed Plainfield and Shelbyville as¬
signments would conform to required
mileage separations and, for this reason,
the second alternative must also be de¬
nied. We will, therefore, assign Chan¬
nel 252A to Plainfield, as requested by
Barlow. Finally, Phillips requests a pro¬
portional power increase for both WIFN
(FM) and WFMS. The matter of such
increases for stations presently short¬
spaced will soon be considered in a sepa¬
rate rule-making proceeding.

Summary of changes resulting from
petitions. 12. In view of the foregoing
petitions, we are adopting the following
changes in the Table:

City and State

Tracy, Calif..

Evansville, Ind.

Kokomo, Ind_

Plainfield, Ind.

Munfordville, Ky__.

Gloucester, Mass-

Fitchburg, Mass-

Durham, N.C_

Harrisburg, Pa-

Lock Haven, Pa.._.

Shamokin, Pa-

Stroudsburg, Pa-

Channel No.

Delete Add

232A

228 A
284

237A
257A
292A

265A
287
228A
252A
272A
285A
283
296A
257A
221A
237A
228A

Potential interference to VHF tele¬
vision reception. 13. Rustcraft Greet¬
ing Cards, Inc., licensee of Television
Station WRDW-TV on Channel 12 at
Augusta, Georgia requests that the Com¬
mission delete Channels 275 and 282
from Augusta. These are the only two
additional FM assignments made to this
community. In support of its request,
Rustcraft urges that the second har¬
monics of both these FM channels fall
within the frequency range of Channel
12, which is 204-210 Mc/s; that the
operation of the FM stations can cause
interference to the WRDW-TV picture;
that the insertion of filters in the TV
receivers is not a practical solution; and
that the only solution is to assign other
channels which will not have their sec¬
ond harmonic radiations falling within
Channel 12. No specific channels are
proposed nor is it shown that other as¬
signments can be made in conformance
with the rules. ..

14. Since the second harmonic of ail
FM frequencies (88.1 to 107.9 Mc/s) fall
within the high VHF TV band, the pos¬
sibility of such relationship between
FM and high-band VHF TV stations in
the same community is very great,
throughout the country. However, ev
if it were feasible to design an FM Tame
with no such combinations, this wo
not solve this potential interfere
problem. In fact, removing these com¬
binations in the same community niig
increase the danger. The PJ?tentia
terference is greatest where the

nal is strongest in relation to tne
signal, and this can occur where , ee
desired television station is at a■
distance and the FM station is
situated. We recently encountered w
problem in just such a situa ^°V: nran .
Supplement to Third Report, Mem r*
dum Opinion and Order, issued herei
on August 1, 1963 (FCC 63-735) .

15. The potential interference ^.

FM stations to high band VHT J *
tions is of two types. One is th c ' ^

by the direct second harmonic r s . yer
of the FM station falling in the reC T his
pass band of the TV receiv are
rarely occurs when the two sta

in the same city since our r r e Dpre s-
rather severe second ha ™°™ c pns ee and
sion on the part of the FM he , *
the ratio of the TV to the ^ Sort
usually large enough to give sa ^0
reception. The second type ° een era-
interference is that due to t si g^is
tion of the second harmo ^ers
within the individual televisio . type
in some nonlinear elements.

FEDERAL REGISTER

11693

Friday , November 1, 1963

of interference lends itself ordinarily to
correction by the insertion of filters de¬
signed to eliminate the FM carrier
fundamental. Such filtering is possible
without any degradation of the tele¬
vision signal because of the wide spacing
between the FM carrier causing the
trouble and the television frequency.
The problem becomes serious where the
television signal is very weak as com¬
pared with the interfering FM signal.

16. The direct second harmonic type
of interference is readily handled by our
rules. 5 The second type is essentially
a receiver design problem. Early TV
receivers included an adjustable FM
trap to eliminate this type of interfer¬
ence. When it became apparent that
the trap was needed only in a small per¬
centage of receivers it was omitted in
all receivers for reasons of economy.
Some manufacturers will supply the trap
free of charge upon request but the cus¬
tomer must make the installation or pay
a service man to do it. Suitable traps
can be purchased for less than $5.00. In
view of the above this type of interfer¬
ence has not been a factor in FM alloca¬
tions. In the past the Commission has
been willing to make changes in assign¬
ments where the parties have agreed to
a relatively simple solution. We shall
continue to do so in the future. In the
instant case Rustcraft is asking that we
delete two of the three assignments
made to Augusta, a city of over 70,000
population with no suggested replace¬
ments. We are of the view that the re¬
quest would not serve the public interest
and are denying it.

Changes on the Commission's own mo¬
wn. 17. Since the Table was adopted,
jt has been discovered (either through
the staff’s continuing study or comments
of interested parties) that certain as¬
signments were made in error in that
they could not meet mileage separations.
J? addi tion, some assignments, because
i spacings close to the minimums, cre-

towi- problern s for applicants. We
axe this opportunity, on our own motion,
change or delete these assignments,
in nf re m a l so makin & two other changes
thp t u? ble on our own motion. First,
for w. e n ° w con tains no assignment
DlinnH art ^ Tennessee , for Which an ap-
beennn n if Pe r Cifying Channel 288A) has
that thl ^ f or some time. It appears
site fnv ! S as ^ lgnmen t can be made if a
at Chfltf 6 ° f the co “ chann el assignment
selects tan A° 0ga ’ Tennessee is carefully
this chanrd? C °r < ^ ngly ’ We are addin £
rule makS^i at v Sparta - A petition for
toward the Sparta
by Septemb er 27, 1963,

thus^renn^ adCaSting Co *> R M-493, is
changi^ thf* m00t * Finall y> we are
! c ^fornia rh^ eS1 f nation of the Alisal,

I refl oct the ann ne !- (264) to Salinas > to
I b y the latt^ le - Xatl0n of the form er city
I ^ereforeth. ^ August of this year,
i Motion Commission, on its own

in the Table* mg the followin S changes

I (2) See § 3.317, paragraphs
N o. 214-

(a)(14) and (f)

City and State

Channel No.

Delete

Add

Alisal, Calif.__

264

240A

Escondido, Calif....

221A
264
257A
271
249A
237A

Salinas, Calif.....

Fort Walton Beach, Fla..

237A
222
237 A
249A
249A
291
296
228 A
265
224A
252A
244A

Savannah, Ga..

Dowagiac, Mich...

Niles, Mich..

Dexter, Mo.___

Faribault, Minn...

228A
288A

Red Wing, Minn__

Bellefontaine, Ohio.

Miami, Okla....

265A
244 A
224A

Huntingdon, Pa..

Martinsburg, Pa.....

State College, Pa...

Sparta, Tenn...

288A

298

236

Dallas, Tex...

295
300
235
298
269A
291
292A

Fort Worth, Tex__

Victoria, Tex_

Waco, Tex..

Grundy, Va.

249A

292A

Bluefield, W. Va...

St. Albans, W. Va.

‘Related to the modification of license of KSEO-TV
at Durant, Oklahoma from Channel 297 to 296A. See
Third Report, Memorandum Opinion and Order. A
construction permit for Channel 295 at Dallas was
deleted on May 6, 1963.

18. In the Third Report we mentioned
that further negotiations were being con¬
ducted with the Canadian authorities
relative to substitute assignments in
Potsdam, New York and Newport, Ver¬
mont. See Paragraph 32 of that report.
The Canadian authorities have agreed to
the assignment of Channel 256 to Pots¬
dam and Channel 300 to Newport, both
as Class C assignments. These addi¬
tions require the substitution of Channel
240A for 257A at Rome, New York and
some changes in Canadian assignments.
The Table of Assignments is herein
amended to reflect this agreement.

In view of the foregoing: It is ordered,
That the Table of FM Assignments con¬
tained in § 3.202 of the Commission’s
rules and regulations is (a) amended, ef¬
fective December 2, 1963, insofar as the
communities named are concerned, to
read as follows:

City and State: Channel<No.

Escondido, Calif_ 221A

Tracy, Calif_ 265A

Fort Walton Beach, Fla_ 257A

Savannah, Ga___ 226,231,238,243,247,271

Salinas, Calif_ 264, 273, 280A

Evansville, Ind_ 281,287

Kokomo, Ind_ 228A, 263

Fitchburg, Mass_ 283

Gloucester, Mass_ 285A

Dowagiac, Mich_ 249A

Niles, Mich_ 237A

Faribault, Minn_ 228A

Red Wing, Minn_ 288A

Rome, N.Y_ 240A

Durham, N.C_ 286, 296A

Miami, Okla_ 265A

Harrisburg, Pa- 235, 247, 257A, 281

Huntingdon, Pa_ 244A

Lock Haven, Pa_ 221A

Martinsburg, Pa_ 224A

Shamokin, Pa_ 237A

State College, Pa_ 276A

Stroudsburg, Pa_ 228A

Dallas, Tex_ 223, 238,

250, 254, 262, 266, 275, 279, 283, 287
Fort Worth, Tex_ 230, 242, 246, 258, 271, 298

Victoria, Tex_221A, 236, 254

Waco, Tex- 238,248,260

Grundy, Va_ 249A

Bluefield, W. Va_ 283, 292A

(b) The following entries are added:

Plainfield, Ind_ 252A

Munfo»dville, Ky_ 272A

Potsdam, N.Y_ 256

Sparta, Tenn_ 288A

Newport, Vt_ 300

Alisal, Calif_ 264

Dexter, Mo_ 249A

Bellefontaine, Ohio_ 228A

St. Albans, W. Va_ 292A

It is further ordered, That the various
petitions for reconsideration noted ear¬
lier in this opinion are granted to the ex¬
tent indicated and are denied in all other
respects, except that the petition of Jo¬
seph L. Lepp, Inc., is dismissed.

It is further ordered. That, pursuant
to sections 303(f) and 316 of the Com¬
munications Act of 1934, as amended,
the following license and permit are
modified with the consent of the parties
involved, effective December 2, 1963:

(a) The construction permit of Simon
Geller for Station WVCA-FM on Chan¬
nel 228A at Gloucester, Massachusetts,
is modified to specify operation on Chan¬
nel 285A, subject to the condition that
the permittee submit to the Commission
by December 2, 1963, all information
necessary to comply with the applicable
technical rules, executed in triplicate,
for the preparation of the modified au¬
thorization to cover the construction of
Station WVCA-FM on Channel 285A at
Gloucester.

(b) The license of WFGM, Inc., for
Station WFGM-FM on Channel 284 at
Fitchburg, Massachusetts, is modified to
specify operation on Channel 283, sub¬
ject to the condition that the licensee
submit to the Commission by December
2,1963, all information necessary to com¬
ply with the applicable technical rules
executed in triplicate, for the prepara¬
tion of the modified authorization to
cover the operation of Station WFGM-
FM on Channel 283 at Fitchburg.

It is further ordered. That the above-
named permittee (Simon Geller) shall,
by May 1,1964, submit his application for
license and request for program test au¬
thority on Channel 285A.

It is further ordered, That the above-
named licensee (WFGM, Inc.) whose li¬
cense has been modified may continue to
operate with its present authorization
until ready to commence operation on
the new frequency in accordance with
the order of modification herein; and
that, upon completion of construction
of its new facilities in accordance with
the terms of the modified authorization,
the licensee shall submit, in triplicate,
proof of performance measurement data
necessary to demonstrate compliance
with the applicable technical perform¬
ance requirements of the rules of the
type normally required to be furnished
in an application for an FM license, at
least ten days prior to the date on which
it is desired to begin program operations
on the new frequency, with the proviso
that program operations are not to be
commenced until specifically authorized

11694

RULES AND REGULATIONS

by the Commission after its evaluation
and acceptance of such data.

It is further ordered, That the peti¬
tions of Valley Hi Broadcasting Corp.,
RM-472, Booth Broadcasting Co., RM-
482, Howell B. Phillips, RM-486, and
Sparta Broadcasting Co., Inc., RM-493,
are dismissed as moot.

(Sec. 4, 48 Stat. 1066, as amended; 47 U.S.C.
154. Interprets or applies sec. 303, 48 Stat.
1082, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 303)

Adopted: October 24,1963.

Released: October 29,1963.

Federal Communications
Commission,

[seal! Ben F. Waple,

Secretary .

[F JR. Doc. 63-11593; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;
8:49 a.m.]

Proposed Rule Making

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Geological Survey
[ 30 CFR Part 222 ]

CONNALLY ACT REGULATIONS

Revocation of Requirement for Reports
of Vessel Shipments

Notice is hereby given of intention to
revoke, effective January 1, 1964, and
under authority of Executive Order No.
10752 (23 F.R. 973), 30 CFR 222.18,

which reads:

§222.18 Shipment by barge, tanker, or
other vessel; reports; certificates. The ship¬
per, or duly authorized agent of the shipper,
a copy of whose authorization has been filed
with the Geological Survey, Department of
the Interior, Washington 25, D.C., of a cargo
of petroleum or petroleum products, or any
part thereof, which has been loaded at any
port in the States of Texas, Louisiana, Ar¬
kansas, or Mississippi, for shipment by
tanker, barge, or other vessel, in whole or in
part in interstate or foreign commerce, shall
transmit by mail to the Geological Survey,
Department of the Interior, Washington 25,
DC., with full postage paid, not later than
24 hours after the date of sailing, a report
and certification, in duplicate, on form
designated OCR-1, made and executed in
accordance with instructions prescribed and
approved by the Secretary of the Interior and
appearing thereon. No such report on Form
OCR-1 is required covering the shipment of
petroleum or petroleum products where the
cargo is loaded and unloaded wholly within
a state.

,,OCR-1 forms have been used a;
o is for cerlain statistics issued b:
e Bureau of Mines of this Department
n/r Sta ^ is ^ ica ^ data are contained ii
w? Monthly Petroleum Statements ii
nnw? Industr y Surveys as to princi
pai tidewater movements of crude oi
na other petroleum products,
bv that the re P°rts require<

to Pnf CF ^ 222 18 are not now essentia
22 fc?« ent of the Act of Februar:
Usp 3 ^ 49 Stat * 30 > as amended; 1!

^^Soii» c 2r ,nly called th<

catioo°u necti ? n with the Proposed revo
Mines’wni 1S P l anned that the Bureau o:
Program 11 llutlate a voluntary reporting
to DmvM° n - a . monthl y summary basi:
tion Thf S11 ? 1 llar statistical informa-
the mnnfM wm permit continuation o
shipments [ y summary reports on the oi
thisSi^ 168 ; The d ^ree to whicl
c urate lnf ° rma tion is current, ac>

extent’to WiU depend on th(

the needed^ f the 011 industr y submit;

I nterestPd data ? n a voluntar y basis,
duplicate ^ part ies may submit, ii
Posed revop^r tten commen ts on the pro
cal Survey ^ he Director > Geologi

: with m thinV nn^ ngt ° n ’ DC ’ 20242

y (30) days after the date o:

publication of this notice in the Federal
Register.

Dated: October 25, 1963.

Stewart L. Udall,
Secretary of the Interior.
[F.R. Doc. 63-11566; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;
8:46 a.m.]

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Marketing Service
17 CFR Part 1096]

[Docket No. AO-257-A101

MILK IN NORTHERN LOUISIANA
MARKETING AREA

Notice of Recommended Decision and
Opportunity To File Written Excep¬
tions on Proposed Amendment to
Tentative Marketing Agreement
and to Order

Pursuant to the provisions of the Ag¬
ricultural Marketing Agreement Act of
1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601 et seq.),
and the applicable rules of practice and
procedure governing the formulation of
marketing agreements and marketing
orders (7 CFR Part 900), notice is hereby
given of the filing with the Hearing
Clerk of this recommended decision with
respect to proposed amendment to the
tentative marketing agreement and or¬
der regulating the handling of milk in
the Northern Louisiana marketing area.
Interested parties may file written ex¬
ceptions to this decision with the Hear¬
ing Clerk, United States Department of
Agriculture, Washington, D.C., 20250,
not later than the close of business the
10th day after publication of this de¬
cision in the Federal Register. The ex¬
ceptions should be filed in quadruplicate.

Preliminary statement. The hearing
on the record of which the proposed
amendment, as hereinafter set forth, to
the tentative marketing agreement and
to the order, as amended, was formu¬
lated, was conducted at Shreveport,
Louisiana, on August 8, 1963, pursuant
to notice thereof which was issued July
30, 1963 (28 F.R. 7911).

The material issues on the record of
the hearing relate to:

1. The level and method of pricing
Class I milk; and

2. Revision of the Class II pricing
mechanism.

The notice of hearing contained a pro¬
posal (No. 2) to delate the base-excess
plan. No testimony was offered either
in support of or in opposition to proposal
No. 2, consequently, no further mention
is made of this proposal.

Findings and conclusions. The follow¬
ing findings and conclusions on the ma¬

terial issues are based on evidence
presented at the hearing and the record
thereof:

1. Class I price. The present Class I
pricing provisions which provide that the
Class I price each month shall be the
basic formula price (Minnesota-Wiscon¬
sin price series) for the preceding month
plus $2.27 should be continued.

Effective June 1, 1962 and based on the
record evidence of a hearing held in
Shreveport, Louisiana, October 30-31,
1961, the pooling procedure under the
order was changed from individual han¬
dler to marketwide pooling. In render¬
ing his decision on this matter the
Assistant Secretary concluded as follows:

While pricing was not an issue at the
hearing, there has been a tendency toward
increased supplies in relation to Class I needs
during the past year and the change in pool¬
ing procedure represents a very substantive
change in the application of the order. Ac¬
cordingly, it is essential that opportunity be
afforded whereby the price level may be re¬
viewed after a reasonable period of operation
under the amended order. It is provided,
therefore, that the present Class I pricing
provisions shall expire 15 months after the
amended order becomes effective.

In accordance with the above conclu¬
sions the Class I pricing provisions would
have expired August 31, 1963. The hear¬
ing held on August 8, 1963 was called at
the request of the North Louisiana Pure
Milk Producers Association, Inc., repre¬
senting in excess of 75 percent of the
producers on the market, to consider an
appropriate Class I pricing mechanism
and level of Class I price after August
1963. It was proponent’s position that
the existing pricing mechanism had pro¬
vided an appropriate price level consist¬
ent with the standards of the “Act” and
hence should be continued.

Because time would not permit com¬
pletion of any amendment action prior
to August 31, the pricing formula was
continued by suspension action for the
month of September and October 1963.

The North Louisiana Pure Milk Pro¬
ducers Association, Inc., has generally
assumed responsibility for supplying reg¬
ulated handlers with full requirements
for Class I milk. To encourage a pro¬
duction pattern consistent with the mar¬
ket’s demand the association operates a
base-excess plan outside the framework
of the order. The association markets
milk of its members and distributes the
monies received from the sale of such
milk in accordance with the rules of their
base-excess plan. Milk not needed by
local handlers is generally disposed of
for manufacturing uses and supplemen¬
tal supplies, as needed, are imported by
the association.

The existing level of pricing has tended
to maintain an appropriate level of sup¬
ply in relation to market demand. Pro¬
ducer receipts averaged 14 million pounds

11695

11696

PROPOSED RULE MAKING

monthly in 1961 compared to 15 million
pounds in 1962 and for the first seven
months of 1963. Class I sales averaged
12 million pounds monthly in 1961, 12.6
million pounds in 1962, and 12.8 million
pounds for the first seven months of
1963. Translated into percentages, pro¬
ducer receipts averaged 116 percent of
Class I sales in 1961, 118 percent in 1962,
and 117 percent for the first seven
months of 1963. Hence, over the two-
year and seven-month period, there has
been a constant and continuing relation¬
ship of receipts and Class I sales approx¬
imating the relationship (120 percent)
which proponents suggest as the opti¬
mum balance to fully supply the market’s
Class I requirements.

While some imports of other source
milk have been required for Class I use,
the quantities involved have been very
minor. During 1962 other source milk
allocated to Class I averaged 39,700
pounds monthly and there is no indica¬
tion of any significant change in 1963.
Because of the relatively small size of this
market (currently 15 million pounds of
producer receipts and 12.8 million pounds
of Class I sales) and the fact that milk
not needed by local handlers must be dis¬
posed of in manufacturing uses outside
the market, continuation of the existing
supply-sales balance with occasional im¬
portations of balancing supplies is eco¬
nomically advantageous in this market.
It is concluded, therefore, that the exist¬
ing Class I pricing formula should be
continued.

Under usual circumstances a pricing
formula which includes a mechanism for
providing appropriate price adjustments
in response to changing supply-demand
relationships has been incorporated in
the Class I pricing formula of most Fed¬
eral orders. While supply-demand ad¬
justors may not necessarily provide the
precise amount of price changes which
might be concluded appropriate on the
basis of a hearing record, they generally
provide appropriate directional price
changes and are thus an essential tool for
alerting producers to desirable produc¬
tion adjustments. In addition they im¬
plement the continuing maintenance of
a price level consistent with the stand¬
ards of the Act.

Notwithstanding the above conclusions,
it is questionable whether an appropriate
supply-demand adjustor can be devised
for the Northern Louisiana market at
this time. Under usual circumstances a
supply-demand adjustor reflecting only
the supply-sales experience in a small
market of the size of this market may
not be relied upon to assure appropriate
price changes or production responses.
Ideally, in such cases, the experience of
the local market and that of nearby Fed¬
eral order markets with generally similar
production conditions and representing
alternative supply sources and/or over¬
lapping sales areas may most appropri¬
ately be combined to construct a depend¬
able adjustment mechanism. However,
on the basis of this record it is not clear
that this procedure would be appropriate
for the Northern Louisiana market. The
market is essentially an isolated market
with little, if any, production or sales
overlap with adjacent Federal order mar¬
kets. In addition, the production-sales

relationship which has been maintained Federal order milk for a substantial por-
for the market bears little or no relation- tion of their needs and use local un¬
ship to that of adjacent markets. Under graded milk supplies primarily as balanc-
the circumstances it is concluded that no ing supplies. When Federal order Class
supply-demand adjustment mechanism II prices are based on such local plant
should be included in the Class I pricing pay prices, there is a strong incentive on
formula at this time. the part of the operator of such plants

2. Class II milk price. The Class II to report lower pay prices than would
pricing provisions should be retained as otherwise be the case. Such plants com-
presently provided under the order. monly pay substantial premiums over

Since April 1961, the Northern Louisi- and above their reported price,
ana Class II price has been determined The four local Mississippi plants here
on the basis of a butter-powder formula involved are located in the production
reflecting reported Chicago butter and areas of the three Mississippi Federal
nonfat dry milk prices. The Class II order markets. They rely heavily on the
price is the butter-powder formula price reserve supplies of these markets and on
during the months of July through Feb- the New Orleans Federal order market
ruary and such formula price less 5 cents for a milk supply. Reported pay prices
in all other months. show a general lack of response to

The North Louisiana Pure Milk Pro- changing price levels for manufactured
ducers Association proposed the aver- milk products purchased under the dairy
age of the pay prices of four Mississippi price support program. For these rea-
manufacturing plants as a basis for com- sons such pay prices are not acceptable
puting Class II prices in lieu of the pres- as a basis of pricing Class n milk in this
ent butter-powder formula price. They market.

proposed that 25 cents be added to the The existing order Class H pricing
average of these pay prices during the formula has provided a Class II price
months of February through August and level which approximates returns real-
35 cents in all other months, in order to ized by the association on the sale of
retain the same level of pricing provided milk for manufacturing uses and which
by the existing formula. The principal is well aligned with the Class II price
reason advanced by proponents in sup- under the North Texas order. Class II
port of their proposal was conformity prices under the North Texas order aver-
with the State Order No. 2 which uses aged $2.99 in 1962 as compared to the
the pay prices of these local plants as the Northern Louisiana Class II price of
basis of pricing Class II milk. $3.02. During the first eight months of

The proponent cooperative handles 1963 the Class H price under North
essentially all of the reserve milk supply Texas averaged $2.94 compared to the
of the market. Milk not needed by regu- North Louisiana average price of $2.98.
lated handlers for fluid use is moved This minor difference is the result of a
through the association’s local balancing slightly different seasonal pricing be-
plant to nonpool plants, primarily for tween the two markets. Both of these
manufacturing uses. During recent markets rely on manufacturing plants
years about 95 percent of such milk has in the same general area as outlets for
been disposed of to the Carnation Milk reserve milk and, accordingly, it is de*
Company plant at Sulphur Springs, sirable that a close price alignment be
Texas (approximately 140 miles from retained. For this reason it is appro-
Shreveport), which plant also is an out- priate that the existing Class II pncing
let for reserve milk from the North mechanism be retained at this time wit
Texas Federal order market. After ad- no change in level of pricing,
justments for assembling and hauling Rulings on proposed findings ana cow-
costs the association has received a re- elusions. Briefs and proposed finding
turn slightly in excess of the order Class and conclusions were filed on benau .
II price for this milk. certain interested parties. These one.

Prior to the April 1961 amendment proposed findings and conclusions a
the Carnation Milk Company plant was the evidence in the record were cons
one of three local manufacturing plants, ered in making the findings ana
the pay prices of which were used as the elusions set forth above. To the ,
basis of establishing the order Class n that the suggested findings and co ^
price during certain months of the year, sions filed by interested parties a
Official notice is taken of the Secretary’s consistent with the findings and c ^
decision of March 3, 1961 revising the sions set forth herein, thejreque
Class II pricing provisions to delete the make such findings or reach su
local plant pay prices as a basis for Class elusions are denied for the reas

II pricing. At that time one plant had viously stated in this decision. and

ceased operation and a second plant had General findings. The nnai a re
discontinued receipt of ungraded milk, determinations hereinafter sen
The volume of ungraded milk had sub- supplementary and in additi ^

stantially decreased at the remaining findings and determinations P _ nce

plant. Accordingly, the Secretary con- made in connection with tlie pre¬
cluded that the change in operations of of the aforesaid order a y i<a ,^ re ^ ; and
these plants seriously impaired their use- viously issued amendments t ^ f( .

fulness as a basis of pricing Class II milk all of said previous findings ^ a f.

and incorporated the existing price ruinations are hereby ratu J h fin din0
formula in the order. firmed, except insofar as sul

The past experience in the use of local and determinations naay D . tion s set
manufacturing pay prices in this market with the findings and detei
is similar to that experienced in various forth herein: a£ ree I

other Federal order markets. Local (a) The tentative mar bv propo^
manufacturing plants adjacent to Fed- ment and the order, as he terras ^ I
eral order markets generally rely on to be amended, and all oi

FEDERAL REGISTER

11697

Friday, November 1, 1963

conditions thereof, will tend to effec¬
tuate the declared policy of the Act;

(b) The parity prices of milk as de¬
termined pursuant to section 2 of the Act
are not reasonable in view of the price
of feeds, available supplies of feeds, and
other economic conditions which affect
market supply and demand for milk in
the marketing area, and the minimum
prices specified in the proposed market¬
ing agreement and the order, as hereby
proposed to be amended, are such prices
as will reflect the aforesaid factors, in¬
sure a sufficient quantity of pure and
wholesome milk, and be in the public
interest; and

(c) The tentative marketing agree¬
ment and the order, as hereby proposed
to be amended, will regulate the han¬
dling of milk in the same manner as,
and will be applicable only to persons in
the respective classes of industrial and
commercial activity specified in, a mar¬
keting agreement upon which a hearing
has been held.

Recommended marketing agreement
and order amending the order. The fol¬
lowing order amending the order as
amended regulating the handling of milk
in the Northern Louisiana marketing
area is recommended as the detailed and
appropriate means by which the fore¬
going conclusions may be carried out.
pie recommended marketing agreement
is not included in this decision because
the regulatory provisions thereof would
he the same as those contained in the
order, as hereby proposed to be amended.

Paragraph (a) of § 1096.51 is revised
to read as follows:

§ 1096.51 Class prices.

Subject to the provisions of §§ 1096.52
and 1096.53, the minimum prices per
hundredweight to be paid by each han¬
dler for milk received from producers
during the month shall be as follows:

(a) Class I milk price. The Class I
r 1 ' shall be the basic formula price
Ior th e preceding month plus $2.27.

Signed at Washington, D.C., on Octo¬
ber 29, 1963.

George L. Mehren,
Assistant Secretary .

IF,R - Doc. 63-11580; Piled, Oat. 31, 1963;
8:47 a.m.]

t7 CFR Part 1138 1

[Docket No. AO 335-A3]

MILK in Rio GRANDE VALLEY
MARKETING AREA

°Am j* Hearing on Proposed
?* e ? dmen,s »o Tentative Market-
9 Agreement and Order

I c ®toS a M t °w e provisl °ns of the Agri-
1 19 37 as fl« ai ^ eting Agreement Act of
IW'fte (7 usc - 601 seq.).

I^rocedure^v^ 1 - 6 rules of Practice and
I toarketinir S o Verning the formulation of
I “tiers (7 pm?reernents and marketing
I a ven of a n. Kv art ^ 900) ’ notice is hereby
IS 1 ® Hilton Tnn i c hearing to be held at
I Paso, Texasv? ’ . n ternational Airport, El

cal time on b< w inning at 10:00 a m -> lo-
H es Pect tk nr^° V T ber 13 > 1963 > with

I ^tative m£w ed am endments to the
1 order agreement and to

gulating the handling of

milk in the Rio Grande Valley marketing
area.

The public hearing is for the purpose
of receiving evidence with respect to the
economic and emergency marketing con¬
ditions which relate to the proposed
amendments, hereinafter set forth, and
any appropriate modifications thereof,
to the tentative marketing agreement
and to the order.

The proposed amendments, set forth
below, have not received the approval of
the Secretary of Agriculture.

Proposed by Dairy Farmers’ Associa¬
tion:

Proposal No. 1. Amend § 1138.51(a)
by increasing the amounts added to the
basic formula by 10 cents for each month
in the six-month period beginning No¬
vember 1, 1963.

Proposal No. 2. Amend § 1138.52 to
reduce by 10 cents the location differen¬
tial credits applicable to milk received
at plants located in eastern New Mexico
including the locations of Tucumcari,
Clovis, Portales, Roswell, Artesia and
Carlsbad.

Proposed by New Mexico Milk Pro¬
ducers Association:

Proposal No. 2. Effective for the
months of January and February 1964,
revoke the provision “for the first eight¬
een months beginning with the effec¬
tive date of this section”. Effective
March 1, 1964, and thereafter, provide a
uniform Class I differential to be added
to the basic formula each month to de¬
termine the Class I price.

Proposal No. 4. Provide that mini¬
mum payments to producers be distrib¬
uted according to a base-excess plan.

Proposed by Central West Texas Pro¬
ducers Association:

Proposal No. 5. Modify § 1138.52 (a)
and (b) so as to provide a Class I price
effective at Clovis, New Mexico, identi¬
cal to the Class I price effective at Albu¬
querque.

Proposed by Foremost Dairies, Inc.:

Proposal No. 6. Amend the Class I
price provision by eliminating all minus
adjustments in areas east and south of
Albuquerque and by raising the price at
El Paso, Texas, to the Albuquerque Class
I price plus 32 cents.

Proposed by Borden Company:

Proposal No. 7. Revoke § 1138.52 in
its entirety.

Proposal No. 8. Amend § 1138.53 to
provide that the Class I price for milk
containing less than 3.5 percent butter-
fat be reduced 20 cents per hundred¬
weight for each one-tenth of one per¬
cent by which such butterfat content is
less than 3.5 percent.

Proposed by Browns Dairy, Inc., and
Standard Dairy, Inc.:

Proposal No. 9. In § 1138.6 “Rio
Grande Valley Marketing Area” delete
the named counties of Mora and San
Miguel, New Mexico.

Proposed by Wholesome Dairy, Inc.:

Proposal No. 10. Exempt the own-
farm production of a handler from any
regulation by the Rio Grande Valley
milk order.

Proposed by Creamland Dairies, Inc.,
and Clardy-Campbell Dairy Products,
Inc.:

Proposal No. 11. Provide a Class HI
to include all milk, the skim milk portion

of which is disposed of for fertilizer or
livestock feed, and dumped after prior
notification to the market administrator.

Provide an appropriate price for such
Class III as follows:

The Class III price shall be computed
as follows: Multiply the butter price
specified in § 1138.50 by 1.15, and multi¬
ply the result by 3.5.

Proposal No. 12. Amend the payment
provisions of the order, at § 1138.80, or
elsewhere, to provide that each handler
shall pay a cooperative association for
milk received by such handler during the
month from such association for which
the association is a handler on the same
dates and at the same rates as prescribed
in § 1138.80 for payments by handlers
to producers.

Proposed by the Milk Marketing Or¬
ders Division, Agricultural Marketing
Service:

Proposal No. 13. Make such changes
as may be necessary to make the entire
marketing agreement and order conform
with any amendments thereto that may
result from this hearing.

Copies of this notice of hearing and
the order may be procured from the
Market Administrator, P.O. Box 8636,
Albuquerque, New Mexico, or from the
Hearing Clerk, Room 112, Administra¬
tion Building, United States Department
of Agriculture, Washington, D.C., 20250,
or may be there inspected.

Signed at Washington, D.C., on Oc¬
tober 29,1963.

Clarence H. Girard,
Deputy Administrator,
Regulatory Programs.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11581; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;

8:48 a.m.]

CIVIL AERONAUTICS BOARD

[ 14 CFR Part 241 ]

[Docket No. 14790]

UNIFORM SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTS
AND REPORTS FOR CERTIFICATED
AIR CARRIERS

Accounting for Investment Tax Credits

October 29, 1963.

The Board, by publication in 28 F.R.
10785 and by circulation of a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, EDR-61, dated
October 2, 1963, gave notice that it had
under consideration proposed amend¬
ments to Part 241 of the Economic Regu¬
lations (Uniform System of Accounts and
Reports for Certificated Air Carriers) to
prescribe accounting requirements for
investment tax credits under Section 38
of the Internal Revenue Code. Inter¬
ested persons were invited to participate
in the rule making proceeding by the
submission of ten (10) copies of written
data, views or arguments pertaining
thereto, addressed to the Docket Sec¬
tion, Civil Aeronautics Board, Washing¬
ton, D.C., 20428, on or before November
7, 1963.

A request has been received that the
time for filing such data, views or argu¬
ments be extended for a period of 30

11698

PROPOSED RULE MAKING

days in order that members of the in¬
dustry may be given an opportunity to
explore available alternatives to the pro¬
posed amendments and to discuss their
findings at the November 6, 7 and 8, 1963
meeting of the Airline Finance and Ac¬
counting Conference of the Air Trans¬
port Association. It appears to the un¬
dersigned that good cause has been
shown for extending the time for filing
such comments, views or arguments con¬
cerning these proposals. The under¬
signed finds that it is in the public in¬
terest to extend the date to December 9,
1963, which will provide the requested
additional period for such submission.

Accordingly, pursuant to authority
delegated under section 7.3C of Public
Notice No. PN-15, dated July 3, 1961, the
undersigned hereby extends the date for
submitting comments on the subject
proposal until December 9, 1963. All
relevant matter in communications re¬
ceived on or before that date will be
considered by the Board before taking
final action on these proposals. Copies
of such communications will be avail¬
able for examination by interested per¬
sons in the Docket Section of the Board,
Room 711, Universal Building, 1825 Con¬
necticut Avenue NW., Washington, D.C.,
upon receipt thereof.

(Secs. 204(a) and 1001 of the Federal Avia¬
tion Act of 1958; 72 Stat. 743, 788; 49 U.S.C.
1324, 1481)

[seal] Arthur H. Simms,

Associate General Counsel,
Rules and Special Counsel Division.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11578; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;

8:47 a.m.]

FEDERAL AVIATION AGENCY

[ 14 CFR Parts 18, 40, 41, 42, 46 1

[Regulatory Docket No. 1621; Reference Draft
Release No. 63-9]

MECHANICAL WORK PERFORMED ON
U.S. REGISTERED AIRCRAFT OUT¬
SIDE OF THE UNITED STATES

Notice of Withdrawal of Proposed
Rule Making »

The Flight Standards Service of the
Federal Aviation Agency has had under
consideration a proposal to amend Parts
18, 40, 41, 42, and 46 of the Civil Air
Regulations to permit qualified indi¬
viduals and maintenance organizations,
including foreign air carriers, in certain
foreign countries to perform mainte¬
nance and alterations on U.S. certifi¬
cated aircraft without the necessity of
obtaining FAA certification of the indi¬
vidual or the organization for such pur¬
poses. The reasons therefor were set
forth in the preamble to the notice of
proposed rule making which was pub¬
lished in the Federal Register (28 F.R.
2049), and circulated to the public as
Civil Air Regulations Draft Release No.
63-9, dated March 2,1963.

Upon further consideration by the
Agency, and in the light of the comments
received in response to the draft release,
it now appears that further study and
investigation of certain problem areas in

the proposal are necessary, and that
changes to the proposal as set forth in
Draft Release 63-9 may be necessary as
the result of this review.

Meanwhile, the Agency will continue
the approval of foreign repair stations
and the issuance of foreign repair sta¬
tion certificates in accordance with the
existing regulations.

Termination of this notice of pro¬
posed rule making constitutes only such
action, and does not preclude the Agency
from issuing another notice in the future,
or commit the Agency to any course
of action in the future.

In consideration of the foregoing, the
notice of proposed rule making published
in the Federal Register (28 F.R. 2049),
and circulated as Draft Release No. 63-9,
dated March 2, 1963, entitled “Mechan¬
ical Work Performed on U.S. Registered
Aircraft Outside of the United States,”
is hereby withdrawn.

(Sec. 313(a) of the Federal Aviation Act of
1958 (72 Stat. 752; 49 U.S.C. 1354))

Issued in Washington, D.C., on Oc¬
tober 25,1963.

G. S. Moore,
Director,

Flight Standards Service.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11549; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;

8:45 a.m.]

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION

[ 46 CFR Part 527 1

[Docket No. 1156]

SHIPPERS’ REQUESTS AND
COMPLAINTS

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

Notice is hereby given in accordance
with provisions of section 4, Administra¬
tive Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 1003) and
sections 15 and 43 of the Shipping Act,
1916 (46 U.S.C. 814 and 46 U.S.C. 841a),
that the Federal Maritime Commission
is considering promulgation of the pro¬
posed regulations set forth hereinafter
covering the consideration of shippers’
requests and complaints.

§ 527.1 Statement of policy.

(a) Section 2 of Public Law 87-346
effective on October 3, 1961, amends sec¬
tion 15 of the Shipping Act, 1916, to
provide that the Commission shall dis¬
approve any agreement after notice and
hearing on a finding of failure or refusal
to adopt and maintain reasonable pro¬
cedures for promptly and fairly hearing
and considering shippers’ requests and
complaints.

(b) It is the responsibility of the Com¬
mission to see that the basic minimal
requirements deemed necessary to ac¬
complish this end are instituted and to
maintain a continuing surveillance over
the conferences and other rate-fixing
agreements to insure that reasonable
procedures are observed.

§ 527.2 Filing of procedures.

Within sixty days from the effective
date of this part, each conference and
each other body with rate-fixing author¬
ity under an approved agreement shall

file with the Commission a statement,
outlining in complete detail, its proce¬
dures for handling shippers’ requests and
complaints.

§ 527.3 Reports.

In January, April, July and October of
each year, each conference and each
other body with rate fixing authority un¬
der an approved agreement shall file with
the Commission a report covering all
shippers’ requests and complaints re¬
ceived and/or disposed of during the pre¬
ceding three-month period, such report
to include the following information:

(a) Date request or complaint was re¬
ceived.

(b) Identity of the person or firm sub¬
mitting the request or complaint.

(c) Nature of request or complaint,
i.e., rate reduction, rate establishment,
classification, overcharge, undercharge,
measurement, etc.

(d) Date final action was taken and
nature thereof.

(e) If denied, the reason.

Such report shall be accompanied by
copies, or if oral, a statement setting
forth complete details, of all such re¬
quests and complaints together with
copies of the notices to shippers of ad¬
vice as to action taken thereon. If said
notice of advice as to action taken is
oral, a complete statement thereof shall
be filed with the Commission.

§ 527.4 Resident agent.

Conferences and other bodies with
rate-fixing authority under approved
agreements domiciled outside the United
States shall designate a resident agent
in the United States with whom shippers
may lodge their requests and complaints.
The resident agent shall maintain com¬
plete records, including the dispostion oi
all requests and complaints filed wit
him.

§ 527.5 Tariff provision.

Tariffs filed by conferences and other
bodies with rate-fixing authority una
approved agreements shall incmae
provision stating where and by w
method shippers may file their requ
and complaints (including the ide
and address of the resident agen ,
ferred to in § 527.4) , and the natur the
extent of data that is desired by ,
Conference in support of such req
and complaints.

Interested parties may participate^
this proposed rule-making proceeding w
submitting 15 copies of wrltte V p er-
ments, data, views, or arguments P
taining thereto, or requests for . w
guments, should the same be a ’ .
the Secretary, Federal Maritime
mission, Washington, D.C., ^

All statements, etc., received w ^
thirty days of the publication o be
notice in the Federal Registe
considered.

By the Commission.

October 23,1963. ^.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11632; Filed. Oct. 31.

8:50 a.m.]

Notices

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Marketing Service

FRESH IRISH POTATOES

Notice of Diversion Payment Program
EMD 3a

In order to encourage the further
utilization of fresh Irish potatoes by
diverting them from the normal chan¬
nels of trade and commerce into the
manufacture of potato starch, potato
flour, or other approved products, in ac¬
cordance with section 32, Public Law 320,
74th Congress, approved August 24, 1935,
as amended, a diversion payment pro¬
gram was made effective on October 25,
1963, and will continue until further no¬
tice, but in any event not later than
April 30,1964, in areas where potato sur¬
pluses have created serious marketing
problems, where manufacturing facili¬
ties are available, and where a market¬
ing plan approved by the Department of
Agriculture has been established to as¬
sist in effectuating the purpose of the
program. Information relative to this
diversion program may be obtained from:
Fruit and Vegetable Division, Agricul¬
tural Marketing Service, Department of
Agriculture, Washington, D.C., 20250.

(Sec. 32, 49 Stat. 774, as amended, 7 U.S.C.

and Sup. 612 c)

Dated: October 29,1963.

Floyd F. Hedlund,
Director , Fruit and Vegetable
Division , Agricultural Market¬
ing Service.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11679; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;
8:4" a.m.]

department of the treasury

Comptroller of the Currency

CA u*i MET NATIONAL BANK OF HAM¬
MOND AND mercantile na¬
tional BANK OF HAMMOND

^ 0t ' ce Rescission of Approval To

Consolidate

t he > Cu^ron St 9 ’ 1963 > the Comptroller of
of thp approved the consolidation
mond National Bank of Ham-

i NatinJ^n 11 ^’ T-Hdiana, and Mercan-

Hond Indian?^ of Hammond ' Ham-
toe ; u° n October 22, 1963, on

toiler 9 of th f banks > the Comp-
a PProval pffon, Currency res cinded his
| uva ‘. effective immediately.

Da to<i: October 28 , 1963 .

•seal] . t

IP* Lom Vtroiler of the Currency.

0C - 63 ~ n 561; Piled, Oct. 31, 1963;
8 *46 a.m.]

FIRST NATIONAL BANK AND LARGlL-
LIERE COMPANY BANKERS

Notice of Decision Granting Applica¬
tion To Purchase Assets

On August 1, 1963, the $271 million
First National Bank, Boise, Idaho, ap¬
plied to the Comptroller of the Currency
for permission to purchase the assets
and assume the liabilities of the $5 mil¬
lion Largilliere Company Bankers, Soda
Springs, Idaho.

On October 18, 1963, the Comptroller
of the Currency granted this application.

Copies of this decision are available
on request to the Comptroller of the Cur¬
rency, Washington 25, D.C.

Dated: October 28, 1963.

[seal] A. J. Faulstich,

Administrative Assistant to the
Comptroller of the Currency.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11562; Filed, Oct. 31 v 1963;
8:46 a.m.]

Foreign Assets Control

IMPORTATION OF CERTAIN MER¬
CHANDISE DIRECTLY FROM TAI¬
WAN (FORMOSA)

Available Certification by the Govern¬
ment of the Republic of China

Notice is hereby given that certificates
of origin issued by the Ministry of Eco¬
nomic Affairs of the Republic of China
under procedures agreed upon between
that Government and the Foreign Assets
Control are now available with respect to
the importation into the United States
directly, or on a through bill of lading,
from Taiwan (Formosa) of the follow¬
ing additional commodities:

Lychee wine.

Plum liquor.

[seal] Margaret W. Schwartz,

Director,

Foreign Assets Control .

[F.R. Doc. 63-11645; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;
8:50 a.m.]

Office of the Secretary

[Dept. Circ. 570, 1963 Rev. Supp. No. 12]

OLYMPIC INSURANCE CO.

Surety Companies Acceptable on
Federal Bonds

October 28, 1963.

A certificate of authority as an accept¬
able surety on Federal bonds has been
issued by the Secretary of the Treasury
to the following company under the Act
of Congress approved July 30, 1947, 6
U.S.C. 6-13.

An underwriting limitation of $1,011,-
000.00 has been established for the com¬
pany. Further details as to the extent
and localities with respect to which the
company is acceptable as surety on Fed¬

eral bonds will appear in the next re¬
vision of Department Circular 570, to be
issued as of June 1, 1964. Copies of the
Circular, when issued, may be obtained
from the Treasury Department, Bureau
of Accounts, Surety Bonds Branch,
Washington, D.C., 20226.

State in which incorporated, name of com¬
pany, and location of principal executive
office

California, Olympic Insurance Co., Los
Angeles, Calif.

[SEAL] JOHN K. CARLOCK,

Fiscal Assistant Secretary.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11564; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;
8:46 a.m.]

FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. RI64-217—RI64—239]

SUPERIOR OIL CO. ET AL.

Order Providing for Hearings on and
Suspension of Proposed Changes in
Rates 1

October 24,1963.

The Superior Oil Company, Docket
No. RI64—217; Skelly Oil Company,
Docket No. RI64-218; George T. Abell
(Operator), et al., Docket No. RI64-219;
Shell Oil Company, Docket No. RI64-
220; Woods Petroleum Corporation,
Docket No. RI64-221; Pan American
Petroleum Corporation, Docket No.
RI64—222; Pan American Petroleum Cor¬
poration (Operator), et al., Docket No.
RI64-223; H. L. Hunt, Docket No. RI64-
224; A. G. Hill, et al., Docket No. RI64-
225; Socony Mobil Oil Company, Inc.,
Docket No. RI64-226; Adams and Hag-
garty, et al., Docket No. RI64-227;
Charles H. Osmond, et al., Docket No.
RI64-228; Texaco Inc., Docket No. RI64-
229; Texaco Inc. (Operator), et al..
Docket No. RI64-230; Gulf Oil Corpora¬
tion, Docket No. RI64-231; Sun Oil Com¬
pany, Docket No. RI64-232; Southwest
Natural Production Company, et al..
Docket No. RI64-233; Texas Gulf Pro¬
ducing Company (Operator), et al.,
Docket No. RI64-234; W. C. Feazel
(Operator), et al., Docket No. RI64-235;
Humble Oil & Refining Company, Docket
No. RI64-236; Humble Oil & Refining
Company (Operator), et al., Docket No.
RI64-237; Union Oil Company of Cali¬
fornia, Docket No. RI64-238; Placid Oil
Company (Operator), et al., Docket No.
RI64-239.

The above-named Respondents have
tendered for filing proposed changes in
presently effective rate schedules for
sales of natural gas subject to the juris¬
diction of the Commission. The pro¬
posed changes, which constitute in¬
creased rates and charges, are desig¬
nated as follows :

TThis order does not provide for the con¬
solidation for hearing or disposition of the
several matters covered herein, nor should it
be so construed.

11699

11700

NOTICES

Docket

No.

Respondent

Rate

sched¬

ule

No.

Sup¬

ple¬

ment

No.

RI64-217—

The Superior Oil Co., i
P.O. Box 1521,
Houston, Tex.

77001.

i 75

RI64-218...

Skelly Oil Co., Tulsa

2, Okla., Attn:
Richard J. Dent.

.do...

RI64-219...

George T. Abell
(operator), et al.,

P.O. Box 430, Mid¬
land, Tex.

RI64-220—

Shell Oil Co., 50 West
50th Street, New
York 20, N.Y.,

Attn: F. C. Sweat,
manager, Gas
Utilization.

151

RI64-221...

Woods Petroleum
Corp., P.O. Box
18547, Oklahoma
City, Okla.

RI64-222...

Pan American Petro¬
leum Corp., P.O.

Box 1410, Fort

Worth 1, Tex.,

Attn: J. K. Smith,
Division Attorney.

275

198

.do.

149

.do.-

172

240

RI64-223—

Pan American Petro¬
leum Corp. (opera¬
tor) , et al.

283

190

_do.

150

.do_.

174

RI64-224...

H. L. Hunt, 700 Mer¬
cantile Bank Build¬
ing, Dallas 1, Tex.

RI64-225...

A. G. Hill, et al.. 700
Mercantile Bank
Building, Dallas 1,
Tex.

RI64-226...

Socony Mobil Oil Co.,
Inc., 150 East 42d
Street, New York,
N.Y., 10017, Attn:
H.H. Beeson, Nat¬
ural Gas Manager.

123

RI64-227...

Adams and Haggarty,
et al., First City
National Bank
Building, Houston 2,
Tex., Attn: Mr. J. C.
Dawson, Jr.

RI64-228—

. Charles H. Osmond,
et al., 600 Camp
Bowie Boulevard,
Room 195, Fort
Worth, Tex., 76116.

RI64-229—

. Texaco, Inc., P.O.

Box 52332, Houston,
Tex., Attn: Mr.

W. V. Vietti.

160

_do.

212

.do.

274

See footnotes at end of table.

Purchaser and producing area

Amount
of annual
increase

Date

filing

tendered

West Texas Gathering Co.
(South Kermit Field, Wink¬
ler County, Tex.) (Permian
Basin Area) (R.R. District
No. 8).

El Paso Natural Gas Co. (Level-
land Plant, Hockley County,
Tex.) (Permian Basin Area)
(R.R. District No. 8).

El Paso Natural Gas Co. (Spra-
berry Field, Reagan and Mid¬
land Counties, Tex.) (R.R.
Dist. Nos. 7c and 8) (Permian
Basin Area).

Northern Natural Gas Co. (Gas
Plants in Crane and Pecos
Counties, Tex.) (R.R. Dis¬
trict No. 8) (Permian Basin

Northern Natural Gas Co.
(Prentice Gasoline Plant,
Terry and Yoakum Counties,
Tex.) (R.R. District No. 8)
(Permian Basin Area).

$365

6, 473

60,900

190

10 - 1 - 6 ;

9-27-63

10- 2-63

Arkansas-Louisiana Gas Co.
(Chick ash a Field, Grady
County, Okla.) (Oklahoma
“Other” Area).

H. L. Hunt and the Estate of
Lyda Bunker Hunt 10 (Whelan
Field, Harrison County, Tex.)
(R.R. District No. 6).

290 10- 7-63

273 9-30-63

United Fuel Gas Co. (Valentine
Field, LaFourche Parish, La.).

Hassie Hunt Trust (Northeast
Lisbon Field, Claiborne Par¬
ish, La.).

United Fuel Gas Co. (Valentine
Field, LaFourche Parish, La.).

Hassie Hunt Trust (Northeast
Lisbon Field, Claiborne Par¬
ish, La.).

Texas Eastern Transmission
Corp. (Bethany and Long-
street Field, DeSoto Parish,
La.).

United Fuel Gas Co. (Florence
Field, Vermilion Parish. La.).

Texas Eastern Transmission
Corp. (Willow Springs Field,
Gregg County, Tex.) (R.R.
District No. 4).

United Fuel Gas Co. (Thorn-
well Field, Cameron, et al.,
Parishes, La.).

Texas Eastern Transmission
Corp. (Greenwood-Waskom
Field, Caddo Parish, La.).

United Fuel Gas Co. (Church-
Point-Northwest Branch
Fields, Acadia Parish, La).

Texas Eastern Transmission
Corp. (Whelan and North
Lansing Fields, Harrison
County, Tex.) (R.R. District
No. 6).

Texas Eastern Transmission
Corp. (Mercedes Field, Hidal¬
go County, Tex.) (R.R. Dis¬
trict No. 4).

Texas Eastern Transmission
Corp. (San Manuel Field,
Hildalgo County, Tex.) (R.R.
District No. 4).

4,380 9-27-63

140 9-27-63

763 9-27-63

13 9-27-63

222

9-27-63

3,084 9-27-63

356 9-30-63

87,804

3,961

19,634

1,285

9-27-63

9-23-63

9-27-63

226 9-27-63

6,613 9-27-63

Texas Eastern Transmission
Corp. (Big Hill Field, Jeffer¬
son County, Tex.) (R.R. Dis¬
trict No. 3).

43,800

9-27-63

Texas Eastern Transmission
Corp. (Frnka Field, Colorado
County, Tex.) (R.R. District
No. 3).

Texas Eastern Transmission
Corp. (Del Grulla, Yeary and
East White Point Fields,
Kleberg and San Patricia
Counties, Tex.) (R.R. Dis¬
trict No. 4).

Texas Eastern Transmission
Corp. (East Taft Field, San
Patricia County, Tex.) (R.R.
District No. 4).

Texas Eastern Transmission
Corp. (Chapman Ranch Field,
Nueces County, Tex.) (R.R.
District No. 4).

4,892 9-30-63

25,645 9-30-63

3,187 9-30-63

10,369 9-30-63

Effective

date

unless

sus¬

pended

Date sus¬
pended
until—

11- 1-63

10-28-63

10- 28-63

12- 1-63

11- 7-63

11- 1-63

II- 1-63
11- 1-63

11- 1-63

II- 1-63

III- 1-63

III- 1-63
i11- 1-63

III- 1-63

i ll r 1-63

II- 1-63

III- 1-63

HI- 1-63

111- 1-63

ill- 1-63

11- 1-63

4- 1-64

3-28-64

5- 1-64

7-64

4- 1-64

4- 1-64
4- 1-64

4- 1-64
4- 1-64
4- 1-64
4- 1-64

4- 1-64

Cents per Mcf

Rate in
effect

Proposed

increased

rate

16.0

2 3 17.0

11.0743

3 * s 17.11475

11.1056

3® 17.1632

13.5

*314.5

«13.0504

2 3 ft 7 14.0552

*12.0

*3 8 13.0

12.9

23 13.1

ii 20. 7

2 10 11 21.1

2* 2« 16. 6212

2 10 23 2ft 16. 8263

ii 20.7

2 1011 21.1

«16. 6212

210 27 16.8263

23 28 16. 6212

2 10 23 28 16.8263

u 20. 7

2 10 11 21.1

15.4

2 3 15.6

ii 20. 7

3 10 11 12 21. 1

23 16. 6212

2 10 23 16.8263

ii 20. 7

2 10 11 21.1

® n 15. 7

13 it 15.9

15.0

*15.6

15.2

11415. 6

18 n 14. 6

s 8 lft 15.6

XT 14.6

s 3 17 15. 6

i« 14.6

2 3 15. 6

w 14.6

3B15.6

* 14.6

2 8 15. 6

Rate in
effect sub*
ject to
refund in
docket
Nos.

G-16952

RI63-81

RI63-138

RI63-119

RI63-138

R163-138

R163-138
R163-82

RI63-144

R162-112

Friday, November 1, 1963

FEDERAL REGISTER

11701

Docket

No.

Respondent

Rate

sched¬

ule

No.

Sup¬

ple¬

ment

No.

RI64-230—

Texaco, Inc. (opera¬
tor), et al.

170

BI64-231...

Gulf Oil Corp. P.O.
Drawer, Houston,
Tex., 77001.

180

.do.

182

BI64-232_

Sun Oil Co., P.O. Box
2880, Dallas, Tex.,
75221, Attn: Mr. R.
L. Sullivan.

Sun Oil Co., P.O. Box
2831, Beaumont, Tex.,
77704, Attn: Mr.
Buford R. Koehler.

RI64-233_

Sun Oil Co., P.O. Box
2880, Dallas, Tex.,
75221, Attn: Mr. R.
L. Sullivan.

Southwest Natural Pro¬
duction Co., et al.,
P.O. Box 1734, Shreve¬

RI64-234

port, La.

Texas Gulf Producing
Co. (operator), et a 1.,
P.O. Box 2199,
Houston 1, Tex.

RI64-235

W. C. Feazel (opera¬
tor), et al., Com¬
mercial National
Bank Building,
Shreveport. La.

RI64-236

Humble Oil & Refin¬
ing Co., P.O. Box
2180, Houston 1, Tex.

201

145

RI64-237

Humble Oil & Refin¬
ing Co. (operator),

166

RI64-238

et al.

Union Oil Co. of Cal¬
ifornia, P.O. Box

7600, Los Angeles 54,

RI64-239

Calif.

Placid Oil Co. (opera¬
tor), et al., 600 Beck
Budding, Shreve¬
port, La.

Purchaser and producing area

Texas Eastern Transmission
Corp. (Hidalgo Field, Hidalgo
County, Tex.) (R.R. District
No. 4).

H. L. Hunt and the estate of
Lyda Bunker Hunt “> (North
Lansing Field, Harrison County,
Tex.) (R.R. District No. 6).

H. L. Hunt and the estate of
Lyda Bunker Hunt i° (Harle-
ton (Whelan) Field, Harrison
County, Tex.) (R.R. District
No. 6).

Texas Eastern Transmission
Corp. (Carthage Field, Panola
County, Tex.) (R.R. District
No. 6).

Standard Oil Co. of Texas (Gist
Field, Jasper and Newton
Counties, Tex.) (R.R. Dis¬
trict No. 3).

Texas Eastern Transmission
Corp. (Hidalgo Field, Hidalgo
County, Tex.) (R.R. District
No. 4).

Texas Eastern Transmission
Corp. (North Ohoudrant
Field, Lincoln Parish, La.).

United Fuel Gas Co. (Lake
Long Field, LaFourche Parish,
La.).

Texas Eastern Transmission
Corp. (Greenwood-Waskom
Field, Caddo Parish, La.).

United Fuel Gas Co. (Cameron
Meadows Field, Cameron
Parish, La.).

United Fuel Gas Co. (Ellis
Field, Acadia Parish, La.).

Texas Eastern Transmission
Corp. (Bethany Longstreet
Field, DeSoto Parish, La.).

United Fuel Gas Co. (Go
Around Bayou Field, Cam¬
eron Parish, La.).

United Fuel Gas Co. (Avery
Island Field, Iberia Parish,
La.).

United Fuel Gas Co. (Calcasieu
Pass Field, Cameron Parish,
La.).

United Fuel Gas Co. (Lake
Hatch Field, Terrebonne
Parish, La.).

Texas Eastern Transmission
Corp. (Lucky and Liberty
Hill Fields, Bienville Parish,
La.).

Amount
of annual
Increase

Date

filing

tendered

Effective

date

unless

sus¬

pended

Date sus
pended
until—

Cents per Mcf

Rate in
effect sub-
ject to
refund
Nos.

Rate in
effect

Proposed

increased

rate

$93,580

9-30-63

»11- 1-63

4- 1-64

1*14.6

23 15.6

444

^-30-63

ill- 1-63

4- 1-64

2‘ 14.5

3 20 21 15, 1

RI61-169

640

9-30-63

• 11- 1-63

4- 1-64

12.7

3 “ 13.1

RI62-114

600

10- 1-63

7 11- 1-63

4- 1-64

15.4

2 3 15. 6

RI63-112

9-30-63

Ul- 1-63

4- 1-64

22 15.4

2 3 22 15.6

RI63-163

10- 1-63

»11- 1-63

4- 1-64

15.4

2 3 15. 6

RI63-112

1,128

9-30-63

i11- 1-63

4- 1-64

23 15.8007

2 ‘° 23 16.8263

7,628

9-30-63

‘11- 1-63

4- 1-64

“20.7

2 10 11 24 21.1

RI63-143

2,236

9-27-63

‘ 11- 1-63

4- 1-64

23 15.8007

2 i° 22 16.8263

10,248

9-26-63

‘11- 1-63

4- 1-64

“ 20.7

3 10 11 21.1

R163-94 •

1,038

9-26-63

‘11- 1-63

4- 1-64

“ 20.7

a 10 li 21.1

R163-94

130

9-26-63

‘11- 1-63

4- 1-64

23 15.8007

2 »° 23 16.8263

696

9-26-63

‘11- 1-63

4- 1-64

“ 20.7

3 10 11 21.1

RI63-94

10,082

9-26-63

»11- 1-63

4- 1-64

“ 20. 7

2 10 11 21. 1

R163-94

2,517

9-26-63

‘11- 1-63

4- 1-64

“ 20.7

2 10 11 21. 1

RI63-95

8,928

9-26-63

»11- 1-63

4- 1-64

23 20.95

2 ‘« 23 21.35

RI63-117

14,361

9-23-63

‘11- 1-63

4- 1-64

23 16. 6212

2 ‘° 23 16. 8263

RI63-132

iSSSw

*Tax e S t 1 l a i Ujd rate increase.

i7.0cents^Mcf)™ 11 * com P uted on basis of the wellhead value (60 percent of
1 includes o'fii?SS» per M * c / impression charge.

'H. L. HuntWr au J uslm ent.

Texas Eastern TransmiSirm a n^ che ^ ule No< f» which covers resale of subject gas to
pocket Nos. G-isSs n iSl P /i 1 L I ^ se S tly mvolved in suspension proceedings
°L G ~ 16G42 > G-19754, RI61-203, RI02-136, RI62-466 and RI63-

11 he*

“ ^eludes acreaceXu M . cf , tax reimbursement.

“Rate includeso 8 3 «?nt nnr d Tvl m f d r?« r Su PP lem ent No. 12.

Two-step periodic escalation* Texas dedicated Reserve Tax reimbursement.

chides P o r r l P f° Sed increas ed rates and
to Pan stained in Supplement No. 5
tion's ( paJf e . ncan Petroleum Corpora-

^heduie I ^ iCan) FPC Gas Rate

5 to Gulf on i ' and Su PPlement No.
pas Ratio sli? °P, 0ration ’ s (Gulf) FPC
applicable .? < ’' U e 182, fall below
fates in Texn^rf* ceiling for increased
but should ho aUroad District No. 6,

g' at f to the buyers’ 6 ??^* £ ecause the y

State « ^da Bun’kfr Hunt” and ^

No 214 _^ nKer Hunt, increased

u Rate in effect as a result of a settlement offer approved by the Commission in a
letter order issued Dec. 24,1959, in Docket No. G-11349.

18 Subject to 0.6 cent per Mcf deduction for amortization of pipeline facilities.

17 Rate is the result of a settlement offer approved by Commission order issued
July 14, 1959, in Docket Nos. G-17160, et al.

18 Rate is the result of a settlement offer approved by Commission order issued
December 4,1962, in Docket Nos. G-13390, et al.

i® Initial rate.

2° Three-step periodic rate increase.

21 Rate subject to a deduction of 0.75 cent per Mcf for compression.

22 Rate subject to a compression charge of 15.5 cents per Mcf.

23 Includes 1.75 cents per Mcf tax reimbursement.

24 Applicable to Pan American's rate only (excludes Gulf Producing Co.).

23 Includes 1.75 cents per Mcf tax reimbursement suspended in Docket No. G-17682
because of questionable interpretation.

28 Includes 1.93275 cents per Mcf handling charge deducted by buyer.

27 Includes 1.18275 cents per Mcf handling charge deducted by buyer.

28 Includes 0.50 cent per Mcf gathering charge deducted by buyer.

resale rates which are involved in sus¬
pension proceedings. 2

All of the proposed increased rates and
charges listed herein (with the except¬
ion of Supplements Nos. 5 to Pan
American and Gulf’s FPC Gas Rate

2 H. L. Hunt FPC Gas Rate Schedule No.
4, which covers resale of subject gas to Texas
Eastern Transmission Corp., is presently in¬
volved in suspension proceedings in Docket
Nos. G—13505, G—16642, G-19754, RI61-203,
RI62-136, RI62-466 and RI63-108.

Schedules Nos. 275 and 182, respectively,
mentioned in the preceding paragraph)
exceed the applicable area price levels for
increased rates as set forth in the Com¬
mission’s Statement of General Policy
No. 61-1, as amended (18 CFR Ch. I,
Part 2, § 2.56).

The proposed changes rates and
charges may be unjust, unreasonable,
unduly discriminatory, or preferential,
or otherwise unlawful.

The Commission finds: It is necessary
and proper in the public interest and to

11702

NOTICES

aid in the enforcement of the provisions
of the Natural Gas Act that the Commis¬
sion enter upon hearings concerning the
lawfulness of the proposed changes, and
that the above-designated supplements
be suspended and the use thereof de¬
ferred as hereinafter ordered.

The Commission orders:

(A) Pursuant to the authority of the
Natural Gas Act, particularly sections
4 and 15 thereof, the Commission’s rules
of practice and procedure, and the reg¬
ulations under the Natural Gas Act (18
CFR Ch. I), public hearings shall be
held upon dates to be fixed by notices
from the Secretary concerning the law¬
fulness of the proposed increased rates
and charges contained in the above-
designated supplements.

(B) Pending hearings and decisions
thereon, the above-designated rate sup¬
plements are hereby suspended and the
use thereof deferred until the date indi¬
cated in the above “Date Suspended
Until” column, and thereafter until such
further time as they are made effective
in the manner prescribed by the Natural
Gas Act.

(C) Neither the supplements hereby
suspended, nor the rate schedules
sought to be altered thereby, shall be
changed until these proceedings have
been disposed of or until the periods of
suspension have expired, unless other¬
wise ordered by the Commission.

(D) Notices of intervention or peti¬
tions to intervene may be filed with the
Federal Power Commission, Washing¬
ton 25, D.C., in accordance with the rules
of practice and procedure (18 CFR 1.8
and 1.37(f)) on or before December 9,
1963.

By the Commission.

[seal] Gordon M. Grant,

Acting Secretary.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11489; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;

8:45 a.m.]

[Docket No. CP63-235]

NORTHERN NATURAL GAS CO.

Notice of Application and Date of
Hearing

October 25,1963.

Take notice that on February 19, 1963,
Northern Natural Gas Company (Appli¬
cant), 2223 Dodge Street, Omaha, Ne¬
braska, filed in Docket No. CP63-235 an
application pursuant to section 7(c) of
the Natural Gas Act for a certificate of
public convenience and necessity author¬
izing the construction and operation of
certain facilities and the sale and de¬
livery of natural gas to Iowa Electric
Light and Power Company for resale by
the latter in the communities of Clarence,
Mechanicsville and Stanwood, all in Ce¬
dar County, Iowa, all as more fully set
forth in the application on file with the
Commission and open to public inspec¬
tion.

Applicant proposes to construct and
operate approximately 6.3 miles of 3-
inch and 2.4 miles of 2-inch lateral pipe¬
line as well as the necessary measuring
facilities. The total estimated cost of the
proposed facilities is $173,900, which cost

will be financed from cash on hand, re¬
serve accruals and retained earnings.

The application Indicates the total es¬
timated third year peak day require¬
ments for the three communities to be
1,049 Mcf.

This matter is one that should be dis¬
posed of as promptly as possible under
the applicable rules and regulations and
to that end:

Take further notice that, pursuant to
the authority contained in and subject
to the jurisdiction conferred upon the
Federal Power Commission by sections
7 and 15 of the Natural Gas Act, and the
Commission’s rules of practice and pro¬
cedure, a hearing will be held on Decem¬
ber 3, 1963, at 9:30 a.m., e.s.t., in a
Hearing Room of the Federal Power
Commission, 441 G Street NW., Wash¬
ington, D.C., concerning the matters in¬
volved in and the issues presented by
such application: Provided , however ,
That the Commission may, after a non-
contested hearing, dispose of the pro¬
ceedings pursuant to the provisions of
§ 1.30(c) (1) or (2) of the Commission’s
rules of practice and procedure. Under
the procedure herein provided for, un¬
less otherwise advised, it will be unneces¬
sary for Applicant to appear or be rep¬
resented at the hearing.

Protests or petitions to intervene may
be filed with the Federal Power Commis¬
sion, Washington, D.C., 20426, in accord¬
ance with the rules of practice and pro¬
cedure (18 CFR 1.8 or 1.10) on or before
November 22, 1963. Failure of any party
to appear at and participate in the hear¬
ing shall be construed as waiver of and
concurrence in omission herein of the
intermediate decision procedure in cases
where a request therefor is made.

Gordon M. Grant,
Acting Secretary.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11551; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;

8:45 a.m.]

[Docket No. RI64-241]

PAN AMERICAN PETROLEUM CORP.

ET AL.

Order Providing for Hearing on and
Suspension of Proposed Change in
Rate; and Allowing Rate Change
To Become Effective Subject to
Refund

October 25,1963.

On September 30, 1963, Pan American
Petroleum Corporation (Pan American) 1
tendered for filing a proposed change in
its presently effective rate schedule for
sales of natural gas subject to the juris¬
diction of the Commission. The pro¬
posed change, which constitutes an in¬
creased rate and charge, is contained in
the following designated filing:

Description: Notice of change, dated Sep¬
tember 26, 1963.

Purchaser and producing area: El Paso
Natural Gas Company (Basin Dakota Field,
San Juan County, New Mexico) (San Juan
Basin Area).

Rate schedule designation: Supplement
No. 14 to Pan American’s FPC Gas Rate
Schedule No. 199.

1 Address is: P.O. Box 1410, Fort Worth 1,
Tex. Attn: J. K. Smith.

Effective date: October 31, 1963. 2
Amount of annual increase: $330.
Effective rate: 13.0 cents per Mcf. 3 4 *
Proposed rate: 13.2295 cents per Mcf. 8 * 5 6 7 #*
Pressure base: 14.65 psia.

Pan American request waiver of notice
to make its proposed rate increase ef¬
fective as of October 1, 1963. Good
cause has not been shown for waiving
the 30-day notice requirement provided
in section 4(d) of the Natural Gas Act
to permit an earlier effective date for
Pan American’s rate filing and such re¬
quest is denied. Since the proposed
rate increase reflects only tax reimburse¬
ment, the suspension period may be
shortened to one day from the date of
expiration of the 30 -days’ statutory
notice.

Pan American proposes partial reim¬
bursement for the full 2.55 percent New
Mexico Oil and Gas Emergency School
Tax which was increased from 2.0 per¬
cent to 2.55 percent on April 1, 1963.
El Paso Natural Gas Company (El Paso)
has protested the rate increase filed by
Pan American. El Paso questions the
right of Pan American under its tax
reimbursement clause to file a rate in¬
crease reflecting tax reimbursement
computed on the basis of an increase in
tax by the New Mexico Legislature in
excess of .55 percent. While El Paso
concedes that the New Mexico tax legis¬
lation effected a higher tax rate of at
least .55 percent, El Paso claims there is
controversy as to whether or not the
new legislation effected an increased tax
rate in excess of .55 percent. Under the
circumstances, we shall provide that the
hearing provided for herein shall con¬
cern itself with the contractual basis
as well as the statutory lawfulness of Pan
American’s rate filing.

Pan American’s proposed increased
rate and charge exceeds the applicable
area price level for increased rates in the
San Juan Basin Area as set forth in the
Commission’s Statement of General
Policy No. 61-1, as amended (18 CFK
Ch. I, Part 2, § 2.56).

The proposed changed rate and charge
may be unjust, unreasonable, unduiy
discriminatory, or preferential, or other¬

wise unlawful.

The Commission finds: It is neces *f;:
and proper in the public interest ana
aid in the enforcement of the P rovls *°. |
of the Natural Gas Act that the Commis¬
sion enter upon a hearing concerning i
contractual basis of Pan American s P
posed rate filing which El Paso has P
tested, as well as the statutory lawful^
of the proposed rate change, and.
Supplement No. 14 to Pan Am er K11S .
FPC Gas Rate Schedule No. 199 oe

2 The stated effective date is the tutor y

after expiration of the required
notice. re flect

3 Includes 1.0 cent per Mcf adde

minimum guarantee for liquids. su p-

4 Applicable only to acreage add , icat gd
plement No. 12. All P revlo _^ s / is m

acreage at 13.2295 cents per Mci_ fi3 _^g3.
subject to refund in Docket No.

6 Tax reimbursement increase. baS is

6 Tax reimbursement compu

of 12.0 cents per Mcf. . for full

7 Reflects partial reimbursement ^

2.55 percent New Mexico Oil a- n< \£ me 0 t
gency School Tax (tax reim^
amounts to 0.2295 cents per Me ) •

FEDERAL REGISTER

11703

Friday , November 1 , 1963

pended and the use thereof deferred as
hereinafter ordered.

The Commission orders:

(A) Pursuant to the authority of the
Natural Gas Act, particularly sections 4
and 15 thereof, the Commission’s rules
of practice and procedure, and the regu¬
lations under the Natural Gas Act (18
CFR Ch. I), a public hearing shall be
held upon a date to be fixed by notice
from the Secretary concerning the con¬
tractual basis of Pan American’s pro¬
posed rate filing which El Paso has pro¬
tested, as well as the statutory lawfulness
of the proposed increased rate and
charge contained in Supplement No. 14
to Pan American's FPC Gas Rate Sched¬
ule No. 199.

(B) Pending a hearing and decision
thereon, Supplement No. 14 to Pan Amer¬
ican’s FPC Gas Rate Schedule No. 199 is
hereby suspended and the use thereof de¬
ferred until November 1,1963, and there¬
after until such further time as it is made
effective in the manner prescribed by the
Natural Gas Act: Provided, however.
That said supplement shall become ef¬
fective subject to refund on November 1,
1963, if within 20 days from the date of
the issuance of this order Pan American
shall execute and file under Docket No.
RI64-241, with the Secretary of the
Commission, its agreement and under¬
taking to comply with the refunding
and reporting procedure required by
the Natural Gas Act and § 154.102 of the
regulations thereunder, accompanied by
a certificate showing service of copies
thereof upon the purchaser under the
rate schedule involved. Unless Pan
American is advised to the contrary with-
m 15 days after the filing of its agree¬
ment and undertaking, such agreement
and undertaking shall be deemed to have

( been accepted.

(c > Neither the supplement hereby
suspended, nor the rate schedule sought
I m be altered thereby, shall be changed
I until this proceeding has been disposed
t or until the period of suspension has
xpired, unless otherwise ordered by the
Commission.

Notices °f intervention or peti-
2 intervene may be filed with the
2S nn ? ower Comm ission, Washington
D ’ 1 m accordance with the rules of

and procedure (18 CFR 1.8 and
1 til) on or before December 9, 1963.

By the Commission,
f seal] Gordon M. Grant,

. Acting Secretary.

I R Doc. 63-11552; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;
8:45 a.m.]

[Docket No. E-7114]

I ST Michaels utilities commission

ET AL.

I ,' Gran,i "9 ^ 0, ‘ 0n for Severance
ont * Providing for Hearing

On i„i October 25, 1963.

Wth th y cnm 96 - 3, a com P 1 aint was filed
l Cities CornTf 11 ® 1011 by Sfc - Michaels
I °* s t. Michaels H lon and Commissioners
I gainst the Fn ..f Vlarj and (st - Michaels),
c °mpany shore Public Ser

| y of Maryland (Maryland Ei

em Shore), alleging, inter alia, illegal
overcharges to St. Michaels by Maryland
Eastern Shore on and after May 1, 1963,
and unlawful discrimination against St.
Michaels and in favor of Choptank Elec¬
tric Cooperative, Inc. and stating that
St. Michaels has been and continues to
be injured and damaged by the alleged
overcharges and discrimination.

On September 17, 1963, St. Michaels
filed with the Commission a motion to
sever the unlawful discrimination issue
and proceed immediately with hearing
and decision of the alleged illegal over¬
charge issue.

On October 11, 1963, Maryland East¬
ern Shore filed an answer to St. Michaels
complaint and an answer to the motion
for severance of issues. Maryland East¬
ern Shore stated that it has no objection
to the prompt hearing and decision with
respect to the illegal overcharge issue.

The Commission finds: It is necessary
and appropriate for the purposes of the
Federal Power Act that the motion to
sever filed by St. Michaels be granted
and that a public hearing be held in the
above-entitled proceeding on the issue
of illegal overcharges raised in the com¬
plaint of St. Michaels and answer of
Maryland Eastern Shore; all is herein¬
after provided.

The Commission orders:

(A) The motion to sever filed in the
above-entitled matter on September 17,
1963 by St. Michaels is hereby granted.

(B) A public hearing in the above-en¬
titled matter shall be held on November
18, 1963, at 10:00 a.m. e.s.t., in a Hear¬
ing Room of the Federal Power Commis¬
sion, 441 G Street NW., Washington,
D.C., respecting the alleged illegal over¬
charge issue as presented in the com¬
plaint of St. Michaels and in the answer
of Maryland Eastern Shore to the com¬
plaint. The hearing on all other issues
raised in the complaint and answer shall
be as fixed by further order of the Com¬
mission.

(C) Notices of intervention or peti¬
tions to intervene in this proceeding may
be filed with the Federal Power Com¬
mission, Washington, D.C., 20426, on or
before November 14, 1963, and in accord¬
ance with the Commission’s rules of prac¬
tice and procedure (18 CFR 1.8).

By the Commission.

[seal] Gordon M. Grant,

Acting Secretary.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11553; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;

8:45 a.m.]

[Docket No. RI64-240]

SOUTHWEST NATURAL PRODUCTION
CO. ET AL.

Order Providing for Hearing on and
Suspension of Proposed Change in
Rate; and Allowing Rate Change
To Become Effective Subject to Re¬
fund

October 25,1963.

On September 27, 1963, Southwest
Natural Production Company, et al.
(Southwest) 1 tendered for filing a pro-

1 Address is: P.O. Box 1734, Shreveport, La.

posed change in its presently effective
rate schedule for sales of natural gas
subject to the jurisdiction of the Com¬
mission. The proposed change, which
constitutes an increased rate and charge,
is contained in the following, designated
filing:

Description: Notice of change, dated Sep¬
tember 19, 1963.

Purchaser and producing area: Arkansas
Louisiana Gas Company (Ada Field, Bien¬
ville Parish, Louisiana).

Rate schedule designation: Supplement
No. 1 to Southwest’s FPC Gas Rate Schedule
No. 19.

Effective date: December 21, 1963. 2

Amount of annual increase: $517.

Effective rate: 13.003 cents per Mcf. 3 4

Proposed rate: 13.453 cents per Mcf. 34

Pressure base: 15.025 psia.

Although Southwest’s proposed pe¬
riodic rate increase is below the applica¬
ble area ceiling for increased rates as
set forth in the Commission’s Statement
of General Policy No. 61-1, as amended
(18 CFR Ch. I, Part 2, § 2.56), it relates
to sales made to Southwest’s affiliate,
Arkansas Louisiana Gas Company.
Under the circumstances, Southwest’s
proposed rate increase should be sus¬
pended for one day from December 21,
1963, the proposed effective date.

The proposed changed rate and charge
may be unjust, unreasonable, un¬
duly discriminatory, or preferential, or
otherwise unlawful.

The Commission finds: It is necessary
and proper in the public interest and to
aid in the enforcement of the provisions
of the Natural Gas Act that the Commis¬
sion enter upon a hearing concerning the
lawfulness of the proposed change, and
that Supplement No. 1 to Southwest’s
FPC Gas Rate Schedule No. 19 be sus¬
pended and the use thereof deferred as
hereinafter ordered.

The Commission orders:

(A) Pursuant to the authority of the
Natural Gas Act, particularly sections
4 and 15 thereof, the Commission’s rules
of practice and procedure, and the reg¬
ulations under the Natural Gas Act (18
CFR Ch. I), a public hearing shall be
held upon a date to be fixed by notice
from the Secretary concerning the law¬
fulness of the proposed changed rate and
charge contained in Supplement No. 1
to Southwest’s FPC Gas Rate Schedule
No. 19.

(B) Pending a hearing and decision
thereon, Supplement No. 1 to South¬
west’s FPC Gas Rate Schedule No. 19
is hereby suspended and the use thereof
deferred until December 22, 1963, and
thereafter until such further time as
it is made effective in the manner pre¬
scribed by the Natural Gas Act: Pro¬
vided, however , That said supplement
shall become effective subject to refund
on December 22, 1963, if within 20 days
from the date of the issuance of this
order Southwest shall execute and file
under Docket No. RI64-240, with the
Secretary of the Commission, its agree¬
ment and undertaking to comply with

2 The stated effective date is the effective
date proposed by Respondent.

3 Includes 1.333 cents per Mcf tax reim¬
bursement.

4 Periodic rate increase.

11704

NOTICES

the refunding and reporting procedure
required by the Natural Gas Act and
§ 154.102 of the regulations thereunder,
accompanied by a certificate showing
service of copies thereof upon the pur¬
chaser under the rate schedule involved.
Unless Southwest is advised to the con¬
trary within 15 days after the filing of
its agreement and undertaking, such
agreement and undertaking shall be
deemed to have been accepted.

(C) Neither the supplement hereby
suspended, nor the rate schedule sought
to be altered thereby, shall be changed
until this proceeding has been disposed
of or until the period of suspension has
expired, unless otherwise ordered by the
Commission.

(D) Notices of intervention or peti¬
tions to intervene may be filed with the
Federal Power Commission, Washington
25, D.C., in accordance with the rules of
practice and procedure (18 CFR 1.8 and
1.37(f)) on or before December 9, 1963.

By the Commission.

[seal] Gordon M. Grant,

Acting Secretary.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11554; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;

8:45 a.m.]

[Docket No. G-13221 etc.]

UNION TEXAS PETROLEUM ET AL.

Order Severing Proceedings, Condi¬
tionally Approving Settlement Pro¬
posals and Conditionally Issuing
Certificates of Public Convenience
and Necessity

October 25, 1963.

Union Texas Petroleum, et al., Docket
No. G-13221, et al.; Cabot Corporation,
Docket Nos. CI60-414 and CI60-499;
Michel T. Halbouty, Docket No. CI60-
700; Magna Oil Corporation, Docket No.
CI61-44; Falcon Seaboard Drilling Com¬
pany (Operator), et al., Docket No. CI-
61-433; State Exploration Company,
Docket No. CI62-326; Humble Gas Trans¬
mission Company, Docket Nos. CI61-290
and CP62-27.

Motions for severance, for approval of
settlement proposals and issuance of
certificates of public convenience and
necessity in their respective dockets were
filed in the above-captioned proceedings
on August 5, 1963, by Cabot Corporation
(Cabot); August 19,1963, by Falcon Sea¬
board Drilling Company (Operator), et
al. (Falcon Seaboard); August 29, 1963,
by Magna Oil Corporation (Magna);
September 9,1963, by Michel T. Halbouty
(Halbouty), State Exploration Company
(State) and Humble Gas Transmission
Company (Humble).

The settlement proposals are similar to
those previously approved by the Com¬
mission 1 2 and provide for the following: a

(1) The issuance of certificates at the
reduced rate of 20.625 cents per Mcf 3 for

1 See e.g., orders issued August 7, 1963, and
October 9, 1963, in Union Texas Petroleum,
et al., Docket Nos. G-13221, et al.

2 See Appendix for further details.

3 All rates expressed inclusive of applicable

tax reimbursement and all volumes expressed

at 15.025 psia.

the sales 4 * under Cabot’s Rate Schedule
No. 55, Halbouty’s Rate Schedule No. 8,
Magna’s Rate Schedule No. 8, Falcon
Seaboard’s Rate Schedule No. 8, State’s
Rate Schedule No. 1, and Humble’s Rate
Schedule No. F-ll. The proposed effec¬
tive date of the rate reductions is April 1,
1963, in all cases except Cabot’s and
Falcon Seaboard’s. The latter two ap¬
plicants propose August 1, 1963, as the
effective date.

(2) The issuance of certificates for the
sales under Humble’s Rate Schedule No.
F-10 at the initial rate of 19.5 cents per
Mcf and under Cabot’s Rate Schedule
No. 51 at the initial rate of 20.0 cents per
Mcf.

(3) Continuation of the collection of
the increased rate now effective subject
to refund in Docket No. RI61-208. 6

(4) Withdrawal of the rate increase
filing presently suspended in Docket No.
RI61-509.®

(5) A five-year moratorium on rate
increase filings (except as provided in
paragraph (8) below) from April 1, 1963
through March 31, 1968, inclusive, in the
proposals of Halbouty, Magna, State and
Humble; and from August 1, 1963
through July 31, 1968, inclusive, in the
proposals of Cabot and Falcon Seaboard.

(6) Extension of make-up periods for
take-or-pay gas to 4 years in all contracts
with lesser make-up periods.

(7) Refunds of all amounts above the
amounts that would have been paid
under the settlement proposals collected
since the effective dates of the rate
reductions.

(8) The applicants may make rate in¬
crease filings (1) prior to the end of the
moratorium periods to the extent that
the maximum suspension period under
section 4(e) of the Natural Gas Act
may be extended beyond 5 months or
the Commission may hereafter b& au¬
thorized to lengthen such suspension
period, and (2) at any time for reim¬
bursement of one-half the amount of
increased State or Federal taxes or pay¬
ments in lieu thereof, provided that such
increase does not exceed the reimburse¬
ment to which the applicant is entitled
by contract.

None of the temporary certificates un¬
der which the sales are presently being
made contain refund conditions and ap¬
plicants do not propose to make refunds
except as noted above.

As noted above, the proposed effective
date of the rate reductions and the be¬
ginning of the moratorium periods un¬
der Cabot’s and Falcon Seaboard’s pro¬
posals is August 1, 1963. In other settle¬
ment orders emanating from the Union

4 The provisions apply to gas ‘‘delivered”
under the respective rate schedules as do the
provisions under other settlements approved
by the Commission. In the context of the
proposals we have interpreted the term to
include gas required to be taken but paid for
and not taken. Our approval of these pro¬
posals is also conditioned upon such inter¬
pretation.

•Related to Cabot’s Rate Schedule No. 51
(CI60—414).

fl Related to Falcon Seaboard’s Rate Sched¬
ule No. 8 (CI61-433).

consolidated proceeding 7 we have re¬
quired that the effective date be April 1,
1963, in order to eliminate any possible
advantage accruing to applicants who
file their proposals later than others. In
accordance with such announced policy,
we shall approve these settlements upon
condition that the effective dates for the
rate reductions in Cabot’s and Falcon
Seaboard’s proposals be April 1, 1963,
and that the moratoria extend through
March 31, 1968.

In keeping with our present policy we
shall require that the applicants pay
interest on the amounts to be refunded
at 7 percent per annum, such interest to
accrue through the last day of the month
in which the respective motions and of¬
fers of settlement were filed.

The settlement provisions for adjust¬
ments in rates according to our order or
orders in Area Rate Proceeding, Docket
No. AR61-2, seek to anticipate in part
the nature of our final determinations
in that matter. It is clear that we shall
make no determinations in this matter
which will control our conclusions in
Docket No. AR61-2. The settlement
proposals also provide that adjustments
in price growing out of the Area Rate
Proceeding, Docket No. AR61-2, should
go into effect upon conclusion of judicial
review of our final order. However, we
cannot now commit the Commission to
conditionally staying the effectiveness of
its final order in Docket No. AR61-2.
These matters should be decided at the
conclusion of that proceeding and our
approval of the settlements will be so
conditioned.

No party has filed an answer to any
of these motions, and we find these set¬
tlement proposals, as herein modified, In
the public interest. .

In accordance with the above we shall
sever these individual dockets from the
consolidated proceeding Union Texas
Petroleum, et al., Docket Nos. G-13221,
et al., omit the intermediate decision in
regard to these dockets 8 and issue cer¬
tificates of public convenience and ne¬
cessity in accordance with the appnca-
tions, settlement proposals and condi¬
tions of this order. ...

With the exception noted below, i
pipeline purchasers (shown in the ap-
pendix) which will receive refunds a
whose overall purchased gas costs
be affected substantially by these se
ments will pass on the refunds and a J re .

their rates in accordance with tn .

quirements of the Commissions
rate orders concerning such purcn or .

The flow through provisions oi o
ders in the recent Southern N f tul c ;fi.
Company rate case 0 do not fore ,

cally to Docket No. CI60-449. There^
in order to avoid a situation fits0 {
pipeline obtains and keeps the be

7 See orders issued August -3, leU fl,
October 9, 1963, in Union Texas P

et al., Docket Nos. G-13221, et al. s p e .

8 The hearings in the Uni01 : o . din g con*

troleum, et al. consolidated P 10
eluded July 25, 1963. ^ . n v

•Southern Natural Gas Comp „ 7 q
Nos. G—20509, et al., Opinion Na

February 18, 1963, -- TPC ’_•

No. 379—A, issued April 19,

FEDERAL REGISTER

11705

Friday , November 1, 1963

refunds and a reduction in gas purchase
costs even though it may be, in the ab¬
sence of such refunds and reductions in
gas purchase costs, earning a reasonable
rate of return on invested capital, we
shall require Southern to report to the
Commission the amount of refund and
interest that it receives as a result of
this settlement, the estimated annual
reductions in purchased gas costs, the
proposed disposition of the refunds and
the proposed rate adjustments, if any, to
reflect the reductions in gas purchase
costs. We shall require Southern to hold
the refunds and amounts equal to the
reductions in purchased gas costs which
will accrue as a result of the settlement
of Docket No. CI60-499 in a special ac¬
count subject to further orders of the
[Commission.

The Commission finds:

(1) Each of the applicants herein is
t a “natural-gas company” within the
meaning of the Natural Gas Act, and is
engaged in the sale of natural gas in in¬
terstate commerce for resale for ultimate
public consumption, subject to the juris¬
diction of the Commission.

I (2) The proposed sales of natural gas
are subject to the jurisdiction of the
ICommission, and such sales, together
with the construction and operation of
[any facilities subject to the jurisdiction
I of the Commission necessary therefor,
A re subject to the requirements of sub¬
notions (c) and (e) of section 7 of the
INatural Gas Act.

I (3) Each of the applicants herein is
i&ole and willing properly to do the acts
jjd to perform the services proposed,

) to conform to the provisions of the
-ural Gas Act and the requirements,
J es and regulations of the Commission
hereunder.

( 4) The proposed sales, together with
and operation of any
thp p to jurisdiction of

commission and necessary therefor,
!a . re QUired by the public convenience
L ^oossity and are in the public inter-
mri con dttions set forth below,

i ca ^ es should be issued as or-
pred below.

certifiJl 16 con( Ktions attached to the
[bythpfi herein issued are required
I (fh v? u ^ lc convenience and necessity.
L thn L party has opposed the waiver
® r oceediug erme<iiate decisions in these

(?) It

is in the public interest and it

isionc S ia J? in carrying out the pro-
louthL n f h 0 the Natural Gas Act that
tots anrt^t require d to submit the re-
faterest accoun t for the refunds,
Hons as orrin p ^ r chased gas cost reduc-
Itw. dered below.
l, A) X? mmis si°n orders:

Fttediat-p ?° tlons for waiver of the in-
J<B) eCISlons are wanted.

IK Socket Nos - CI 60 -

T 3 CI62 -Tofi C ll°7 700 ' CI61-44, CI61-

te-issA-saa

sa, 5T- *

the conditions set forth herein to the
applicants for the sales of natural gas
in interstate commerce for resale as pro¬
posed and as modified by the settlement
proposals and this order, and for the
construction and operation of any fa¬
cilities subject to the jurisdiction of the
Commission necessary therefor, as more
fully described in the applications and
settlement proposals herein.

(D) The certificates issued by para¬
graph (C) above, are granted upon the
express condition that the applicants
comply fully with the terms of the set¬
tlement proposals which settlements are
expressly approved, as modified by this
order and upon the express condition
that applicants make refunds of all
amounts above the amounts that would
have been paid under the settlements
proposals as approved, collected since
the effective dates of the rate reductions.
Interest on all amounts to be refunded
shall accrue through the last day of the
month in which the respective proposals
were fixed, August 31 in the cases of
Cabot, Magna and Seaboard, and Sep¬
tember 30, 1963 in the cases of Hal-
bouty, State and Humble.

(E) The certificates issued to Cabot
and Falcon Seaboard are issued upon
the express condition that the effective
date of the rate reductions and com¬
mencement of the moratorium periods
under their respective rate schedules
covered thereby shall be April 1, 1963.

(F) Within 30 days after making the
refunds required by the terms and con¬
ditions of this order and the settlement
proposals the applicants shall report to
the Commission, in triplicate, the
amount of the refunds made to each
pipeline purchaser, showing separately
the amount of principal and interest so
paid and the bases used for such deter¬
minations, together with releases from
the purchasers showing receipt of the
refunds in conformity to the settlements
and the conditions of this order.

(G) Upon full compliance of the ap¬
plicants with all the terms of this order
and of the settlement proposals as modi¬
fied, the applicants shall be relieved of
any further refund obligations in these
certificate proceedings and said proceed¬
ings shall terminate.

(H) The certificates herein issued are
not transferable and shall be effective

only so long as the applicants continue
the acts and operations hereby author¬
ized in accordance with the provisions
of the Natural Gas Act and the appli¬
cable rules, regulations and orders of the
Commission.

(I) The grant of the certificates here¬
in shall not be construed as a waiver of
the requirements of section 4 of the Nat¬
ural Gas Act, or Part 154 of the regula¬
tions thereunder; Provided, however,
That the 30-day notice provision of
§ 154.94(b) and the detailed submittal
requirements of § 154.94(f) are hereby
waived insofar as they apply to the fil¬
ing of reductions in rates as required by
this order and the settlement proposals.

(J) The grant of certificates herein
and approval of the settlement pro¬
posals is without prejudice to any find¬
ings or orders which have been or may
hereafter be made by the Commission
in any proceeding now pending or here¬
after instituted by or against the appli¬
cants, particularly any proceeding under
section 5 of the Natural Gas Act and is
without prejudice to claims or conten¬
tions which may be made by the Com¬
mission, applicants, the Commission
staff, or any affected party herein in
any other proceeding.

(K) Within 15 days from the date of
receipt of refunds and interest required
by this order, Southern shall submit a
report to the Commission and serve a
copy on its jurisdictional customers, and
the various state utility commissions
wherein it does business, setting forth
the amount of refund and interest re¬
ceived, and the estimated annual reduc¬
tion in purchased gas costs due to the
rate reductions herein, and the proposed
disposition of such refunds and interest
and the proposed rate adjustments to
reflect the reductions in gas purchase
costs. Pending Commission action and
further orders respecting such proposed
dispositions and adjustments, Southern
shall hold such refunds, interest and
amounts equal to the reduction in pur¬
chased gas costs which accrue as a re¬
sult of the settlement in Docket No.
CI60-499 in a special account (without
interest obligation).

By the Commission.

[seal] Gordon M. Grant,

Acting Secretary.

Appendix

Applicant

Rate

schedule

No.

Docket No.

Purchaser

Present
rate (cent/
Mcf)

Settlement
rate (cent/
Mcf)

Michael T. Halbouty.

State Exploration Co.

Humble Gas Transmission Co.

Do...

Magna Oil Corp.....

Falcon Seaboard Drilling Co.
(operator^, et al.

Cabot Corp.

Do.

F-10

F-ll

C160-700_

C162-326._

CP61-290_

CP62-27_

C161-44.

C161-433._

CI60-411_

C160-499_

American Louisiana Pipe Line
Co.

Trunkline Gas Co.

United Fuel Gas Co..

Florida Gas Transmission Co.
Texas Gas Transmission Corp.
American Louisiana Pipe Line
Co.

United Gas Pipe Line Co_

Southern Natural Gas Co.

21.5

21.25

19.5

21.5
20. 75

1 21.5

2 22.0

23.25

20.625

20. 625
19.5

20.625
20.625
20. 625

20.0

20.625

1 Falcon Seaboard proposes to withdraw the rate increase filing now suspended in Docket No. RI61-509.

2 This rate now in effect subject to refund in Docket No. RI62-208, and according to Cabot’s settlement proposal
this rate will continue in effect subject to refund.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11555; Filed, Oct. 31,1963; 8:46 a.m]

11706

NOTICES

[Docket G—13221 etc.]

UNION TEXAS PETROLEUM ET AL.

Order Severing Proceedings, Condi¬
tionally Approving Settlement
Agreement and Conditionally Issu¬
ing Certificates of Public Conven¬
ience and Necessity

October 25,1963.

Union Texas Petroleum, et al., Texaco,
Inc., Docket Nos. G-13221, et al., G-
16994, G-17779, G-20251, CI160-518,

16994, G-17779, G-20251, CI60-518,

CI61-1416, CI61-1420, CI61-1438, CI61-
1463, CI61-1713, CI62-16, CI62-407, CI63-
449, and CI63-756.

Texaco, Inc. (Texaco) and certain
interested interveners, 1 submitted on
April 26, 1963, a settlement agreement
and a motion for severance of the seven¬
teen Texaco dockets listed above from
the consolidated certificate proceeding.
Union Texas Petroleum, et al.. Docket
Nos. G-13221, et al. The motion also re¬
quested the expeditious issuance of per¬
manent certificates of public convenience
and necessity according to the applica¬
tions as modified by the settlement agree¬
ment in twelve of the dockets. The agree¬
ment proposed that the sales in Docket
Nos. CI61-1416, CI61-1420, CI61-1438,
CI63-449, and CI63-756 continue under
temporary authorization.

Answers in opposition to this motion
were filed on May 6, 1963, by the Penn¬
sylvania Public Utility Commission
(Pennsylvania), and the Memphis Gas,
Light and Water Division of the City of
Memphis, Tennessee (Memphis). The
Public Service Commission of New York
(PSC) on May 14, 1963, filed a response
in opposition to the motion. Because of
the opposition by parties and without
passing on the merits of the settlement
proposal, on May 21, 1963, we issued an
order denying the motion. 3

On May 31,1963, Memphis filed a with¬
drawal of objection and on July 31, 1963,
Pennsylvania filed an ‘‘Amended An¬
swer” to the Texaco, et al., motion with¬
drawing its objection.

On July 23,1963, Texaco filed a motion
for reconsideration of our order of May
21, 1963, denying the Texaco, et al., mo¬
tion for severance and a “Notice of Modi¬
fication of Settlement Agreement.” This
modification resulted in the elimination
of all objections. 3 On August 2,1963, the
interveners listed in footnote 1 supra filed
a response urging approval.

1 The Brooklyn Union Gas Company, Con¬
solidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.,
Philadelphia Gas Works Division of the
United Gas Improvement Company, Public
Service Electric and Gas Company, South
Jersey Gas Company, The United Gas Im¬
provement Company, the New England dis¬
tributors group (consisting of 41 distribu¬
tors), the East Ohio Gas Company, Hope
Natural Gas Company, Lake Shore Pipe Line
Company, New York State Natural Gas Cor¬
poration, The Peoples Natural Gas Company,
and The River Gas Company.

2 Texaco Inc., et al., Docket Nos. G-14967,
et al., Order Denying Motion for Severance,
for Approval of Settlement Agreement and
for Issuance of Permanent Certificates and
Request for Prompt Determination.

3 PSC did not formally withdraw its objec¬
tions but the modification eliminated the
bases for them.

The settlement agreement as now
modified is similar to the settlement ap¬
proved for Humble Oil & Refining Com¬
pany 4 * and provides the following: *

(1) In respect to the Texaco Rate
Schedules listed in paragraphs (2), (3)
and (4) below, a moratorium on rate in¬
crease filings from April 1, 1963, through
March 31, 1968; except that such filings
may be made (1) prior to April 1, 1968,
to the extent that the maximum statu¬
tory suspension period under section 4(e)
of the Natural Gras Act may be extended
beyond 5 months or the Commission may
hereafter be authorized to lengthen such
suspension period, and (2) at any time for
reimbursement of one-half the amount of
increased State or Federal taxes or pay¬
ments in lieu of taxes, provided that such
increase does not exceed the reimburse¬
ment to which Texaco is entitled by
contract.

(2) Permanent certification at settle¬
ment rates of 20.625 cents per Mcf 6 in¬
clusive of applicable tax reimbursement
for gas delivered 7 pursuant to Texaco’s
Rate Schedules Nos. 209 (G-20251), 217
(CI60-518), 221 (CI61-60), 223 (CI61-
962), 236 (CI61-1420), 237 (CI61-1463),
238 (CI61-1438), 239 (CI61-1416), 240
(CI61-1713), 243 (CI62-16), 250 (CI62-
407), 295 (CI61-969), 306 (CI63-449)
and 308 (CI63-756). 8 *

(3) Permanent certification at the
contractual initial rate of 19.05 cents per
Mcf inclusive of tax reimbursement for
gas delivered pursuant to Texaco’s Rate
Schedule No. 278 (G-17779).

(4) Permanent certification at con¬
tractual initial rates of 20.25 cents per
Mcf, inclusive of tax reimbursement, for
gas delivered pursuant to Texaco’s Rate
Schedules Nos. 189 (G-16994) and 231
(CI61-955).

(5) Prospective upward or downward
adjustment of settlement rates according
to any applicable area rate or rates de¬
termined in Area Rate Proceeding,
Docket No. AR61-2.

(6) Collection of the increased rates
now in effect subject to refund in Docket
Nos. RI62-309, 0 and RI61-419, 10 to be con¬
tinued, subject to further orders of the
Commission in those suspension dockets.

(7) Extension of the make-up period
for gas paid for but not taken to 4 years
in any case where the contract provides
a lesser make-up period.

(8) Full refunds with interest at 7
percent per annum accruing through
March 31,1963, to be paid on all amounts
collected by Texaco in excess of the pro¬
posed settlement rate of 20.625 cents per

4 See order issued August 7, 1963, in Union
Texas Petroleum, et al., Docket Nos. G-13221,

et al.,-FPC-.

6 See Appendix below for further details.

8 All volumes expressed at 15.025 psia.

7 The term “delivered” is used in the pro¬
posals as in other proposals approved by us.
In the context of the proposals we inter¬
preted the term to include gas required to be
taken during the moratorium periods but
paid for and not taken. Our approval of
these settlements is also conditioned upon
such interpretation.

8 As amended on July 15, 1963 (to add
acreage).

0 Related to Supplement No. 4 to Texaco’s
F.P.C. Gas Rate Schedule No. 189.

10 Related to Supplement No. 1 to Texaco’s
F.P.C. Gas Rate Schedule No. 231.

Mcf for gas purchased under Texaco’s
Rate Schedules Nos. 233 (CI61-962), 237
(CI61-1463) and 240 (CI61-1713). In
each instance the sales are being made
under temporary authorizations subject
to refund of amounts above the rate
required by public convenience and
necessity.

(9) Full refunds of all amounts above
the settlement rates collected by Texaco
since April 1, 1963, the effective date of
the rate reductions.

In keeping with our present policy we
shall require that Texaco pay interest
on all amounts to be refunded, includ¬
ing those amounts collected for gas de¬
livered since April 1, 1963, above the
settlement rates. Such interest shall ac¬
crue through July 31, 1963, the last day
of the month in which the revised settle¬
ment agreement was filed.

The settlement provisions for adjust¬
ments in rates according to our order or
orders in Area Rate Proceeding, Docket
No. AR61-2, seek to anticipate in part
the nature of our final determinations in
that matter. It is clear that we shall
make no determinations in this matter
which will control our conclusions in
Docket No. AR61-2. The settlement pro¬
posal also provides that adjustments in
price growing out of the Area Rate Pro¬
ceeding, Docket No. AR61-2, should go
into effect upon conclusion of judicial
review of our final order. However, we
cannot now commit the Commission to
conditionally staying the effectiveness of
its final order in Docket No. AR61-2.
These matters should be decided at the
conclusion of that proceeding and our
approval of the settlement will be so
conditioned.

We find the settlement proposal as
modified to be in the public interest*
Accordingly, we shall sever the above-
captioned Texaco dockets from the con-
solidated proceedings in Union Texas
Petroleum, et al.. Docket Nos. G? 1 , ’
et al., omit the intermediate decisions
regard to these dockets 11 and condit) ‘
ally issue certificates of public conven¬
ience and necessity.

The Commission finds:

(1) Texaco Inc. is a “natural-gas com

pany” within the meaning of the Na
Gas Act, and is engaged in the sa
natural gas in interstate commerce |
resale for ultimate public consump j
subject to the jurisdiction of the
mission. , aS i

(2) The proposed sales of natura 1 e

are subject to the jui-isdietion
Commission, and such sales, tog (
with the construction and °P er ? dic ti 0 n 1
any facilities subject to the jui. e f or ,
of the Commission necessary i sub . i
are subject to the requirements ^
sections (c) and (e) of section
Natural Gas Act. _ nner iy 1

(3) Texaco is able and willing P ^ rV .

to do the acts and to P er ^°?? m to tltf I
ices proposed, and to conioi an( j
provisions of the Natural Ga ^^

the requirements, rules ana
of the Commission thereunae . with I

(4) The proposed sales togei any
the construction and opeia

The hearings in the Union ^n* |

leum, et al., consolidated .

eluded July 25,1963.

petro - 1

FEDERAL REGISTER

11707

Friday, November 1, 1963

facilities subject to the jurisdiction of
the Commission and necessary therefor,
are required by the public convenience
and necessity and are in the public in¬
terest upon the conditions set forth be¬
low, and certificates should be issued as
ordered below.

(5) The conditions attached to the
certificates herein issued are required by
the public convenience and necessity.

(6) No party opposes the waiver of
intermediate decision in these

[proceedings.

The Commission orders:

(A) The motion for waiver of the in-
Itermediate decision is granted.

(B) The matters in the Texaco dockets
isted in the caption to this order are
hereby severed from the consolidated
proceeding, Union Texas Petroleum,

tal., Docket Nos. G-13221, et al.

(C) Certificates of public convenience
md necessity are hereby issued upon the
conditions set forth herein to Texaco,
[nc. for the sales of natural gas in in¬
terstate commerce for resale as proposed
land as modified by the settlement pro-

)sal and this order, and for the con-
uction and operation of any facilities
subject to the jurisdiction of the Com¬
mission necessary therefor, as more fully
[described in Texaco’s applications and
settlement agreement as modified herein.

(D) The certificates issued by para¬
graph (C) above, are granted upon the

:press condition that Texaco comply
illy with the terms of the settlement
ireement as modified which settlement
5 expressly approved under the condi-
pons of this order.

(E) Within 30 days after making the
refunds required by the terms and con¬
ations of this order and the settlement
proposal as modified, Texaco shall re-
^prt to the Commission, in triplicate,
me amount of the refunds made to its
Pipeline purchasers, showing separately

amount of the principal and interest
©paid and the bases used for such
determination, together with releases
F m the purchasers showing receipt of
r e refunds in conformity to the settle¬
ment as approved.

iff U pon ful1 compliance of Texaco
a H the terms of this order and of the
LffHt Proposal as modified, Texaco
jSLJ? reli . eved of any further refund
V g ^ Pns in these certificate proceed-
kk and said Proceedings shall termi-

cer tificates herein issued are
fa tra? Sferable and shall be effective

knd nnn° n 5 as Texaco continues the acts
iordanpI atl ^ s hereb y authorized in ac-
jrai ell the provi sions of the Nat-
tegulatmn Act and applicable rules,
Rations and orders of the Commis-

shaiwJVT 811 *' certificates here-
ie reoni 0t be con strued as a waiver of
•JSf of section 4 of the
iations ihl Act ’ or ^ art 154 °f the re ^“
ha t the Provid ed, however ,

54 . 94 (b) !i ay n °tice provision of
Mremenfo 11 ^ de tailed submittal

f aiv ed insofar^ § , 1 . 54 - 94(f) are hereby
of r^uctiL aS they apply t0 the fil “
ierderani ^ m rate as required by
er and the settlement proposal.

(I) The grant of certificates herein
and approval of the settlement proposal
is without prejudice to any findings or
orders which have been or may hereafter
be made by the Commission in any pro¬
ceeding now pending or hereafter insti¬
tuted by or against Texaco, particularly
any proceeding under section 5 of the
Natural Gas Act, and is without preju¬
dice to claims or contentions which may
be made by the Commission, Applicant,

the Commission staff, or any affected
party herein in any other proceeding.

(J) Interest on amounts to be re¬
funded to the pipeline purchasers shall
accrue through the last day of the month
in which the final settlement agreement
was filed, July 31, 1963.

By the Commission.

[seal] Gordon M. Grant,

Acting Secretary.

Appendix

TEXACO, INC.

Certificate docket No.

Rate

schedule

No.

Purchaser

Current

rate

Proposed

settlement

rate

G-16994

189

United Gas Pipe Line Co....

22.25

2 20.25

G-20251

209

Hope Natural Gels Co___

23.55

20.625

C160-518

217

Tennessee Gas Transmission Co.

23.60

20.625

C161-60

221

_do..

22.8333

20.625

C161-955

231

United Gas Pipe Line Co._

23.30

i 20.25

CTfil-962

233

Texas Gas Transmission Corp.

23.25

20.625

CT61-1420

236

Florida Gas Transmission Co. 2 ...

21.26

20.625

C161-1463

237

Tennessee Gas Transmission Co...

20.80

20.625

C161-1438

238

Florida Gas Transmission Co. 2 ...

21.25

20.625

CI61-1416

239

_do....

21.25

20.625

CI61-1713

240

Tennessee Gas Transmission Co..

22.80

20.625

C162-16

243

United Gas Pipe Line Co..

21.25

20.625

C162-407

250

Transco Gas Pipe Line Corp...

21.25

20. 625

G-17779

278

_do......

19.05

C161-969

295

...do....

21.15

20.625

C163-449

306

United Fuel Gas Co...

20.7

20.625

C163-756

308

_do...

20.7

20.625

1 The offer of settlement provides for permanent certification at the initial contract rate of 20.25 per Mcf with the
provision that the 4(e) rates in Docket Nos. RI62-307 (RS-189) and RI61-419 (RS-231) remain in effect pending the
outcome of the suspension proceedings.

2 Formerly Coastal Transmission Corporation.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11556; Filed, Oct. 31,1963; 8:46 a.m.]

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Great Lakes Pilotage Administration

[Proceeding No. 1-62]

WILLIAM E. GOLDEN

Order Revoking Registration as U.S.

Registered Pilot

In the matter of Captain William E.
Golden, U.S. Registered Pilot No. 0026,
respondent, Proceeding No. 1-62.

Captain William E. Golden, 708 Greene
Street, Ogdensburg, New York, herein¬
after called the Respondent, by letter
dated June 29, 1962 was charged by the
Administrator of the Great Lakes Pilot¬
age Administration with violations of
the Great Lakes Pilotage Act of 1960, 46
U.S.C. 216(b) and the Great Lakes Pilot¬
age Regulations issued thereunder, 46
CFR Part 401, et seq.

The proceeding was brought under sec¬
tion 4(c) of the Great Lakes Pilotage
Act and section 5 of the Administrative
Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 1004), to deter¬
mine whether the registration as a U.S.
Registered Pilot as evidenced by certifi¬
cate of registration No. 0026, issued on
April 2, 1961 to the Respondent by the
Great Lakes Pilotage Administration
should be suspended or revoked for not
being available to perform pilotage at
the Cape Vincent, New York and Corn¬
wall, Canada pilotage offices on May 1-3,
1962 and May 21, 1962, respectively, and
by refusing to accept an assignment as a
pilot from the Cape Vincent pilotage of¬
fice on June 11, 1962.

As reflected by the record, certificate
of registration No. 0026 issued to Captain

Golden on April 2, 1961, having a validity
period of two years from the date of issu¬
ance thereof, expired on April 2, 1963,
during the pendency of the instant pro¬
ceeding. Application for renewal of the
certificate of registration filed by Cap¬
tain Golden on April 30, 1963 was denied
and on July 16 and July 17, 1963, a hear¬
ing requested by Captain Golden was
held before a Hearing Examiner on the
refusal to renew. As of this date, the
Examiner has not submitted his recom¬
mended report and findings.

Notwithstanding the fact that it had
not yet been determined whether Cap¬
tain Golden was, as a matter of right,
entitled to have his certificate of regis¬
tration renewed, the Examiner, in this
case, knowing the facts, determined to
proceed with the revocation hearing just
as though Captain Golden were still reg¬
istered as a pilot under the Great Lakes
Pilotage Act. I concur in this determina¬
tion by the Hearing Examiner.

Hearings in the instant proceeding
were held at Massena, New York on Au¬
gust 1, 2, 3, October 2, 3, and November
28, 29, 1962, before Albert E. Luttrell, the
Hearing Examiner,_ hereinafter called
the Examiner, assigned pursuant to sec¬
tion 11 of the Administrative Procedure
Act (5 U.S.C. 1010). Briefs were filed by
the Government and by the respondent.
The Government and the respondent
submitted oral and documentary evi¬
dence, called witnesses, and conducted
cross-examination of the evidence and
testimony presented for the full and true
disclosure of the facts.

Upon completion of the reception of
evidence, the Government and the re-

11708

NOTICES

spondent submitted briefs and recom¬
mended findings.

On June 28, 1963 the Examiner sub¬
mitted his recommended report and
findings to the Agency for initial de¬
cision. The Government and the re¬
spondent were afforded opportunity to
file exceptions. The Government did
not file exceptions. The respondent filed
exceptions to the recommended report
and findings and proposed Agency find¬
ings and conclusions.

Respondent's exceptions. The re¬
spondent submitted five exceptions to
the recommended report and findings of
the Examiner.

The exceptions and supporting reasons
challenged the legal authority and juris¬
diction of the Agency in making its
charges and in the conduct of the pro¬
ceeding.

The authority for the charges and con¬
duct of the proceeding is well established
by the provisions of the Great Lakes
Pilotage Act of 1960 (46 U.S.C 216(b)),
the Great Lakes Pilotage Regulations
(46 CFR 401) issued pursuant thereto,
and the Administrative Procedure Act
(5 U.S.C. 1004) et seq.

There is no reliable, probative, or sub¬
stantial evidence in the record which
supports any of the five exceptions or
part thereof that the charges and pro¬
ceedings were not lawfully conducted.

Having reviewed the exceptions and
the reasons thereof, which are found to
be unsupported and without merit, it is
ruled that exceptions 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 are
not found.

Respondent's proposed findings and
conclusions. The respondent submitted
ten proposed findings and conclusions.
The proposed findings and conclusions
consisted of further argument in repeti¬
tion of matters heard before the Exam¬
iner which were presented in considera¬
ble detail by the respondent. There is
no evidence which shows that these mat¬
ters were not duly and properly consid¬
ered by the Examiner in the preparation
of the recommended report and findings.
Having reviewed the ten proposed find¬
ings and conclusions it is ruled that the
proposed findings and conclusions items
1 through 10 are without merit and are
herewith denied. ^

Conclusions and findings. Review of
the record made at the reception of
evidence by the Examiner and the ex¬
hibits attached thereto, clearly estab¬
lishes that the recommended report and
findings submitted by the Examiner are
fair, just, and necessary in the public
interest to achieve effective enforcement
of the law and to achieve an effective and
efficient pilotage service on the Great
Lakes pursuant to the intent and pur¬
pose of the Great Lakes Pilotage Act of
1960 (46 U.S.C. 216(b)).

Therefore, with full and proper con¬
sideration of all issues of law and fact
presented on the record, the “Recom¬
mended Report and Findings’* of the
Examiner is hereby affirmed and it is
found:

(1) That Respondent Captain William
E. Golden violated the Great Lakes Pilot¬
age Act and the regulations issued there¬
under as alleged in the letter of charges
by not being available to perform pilot¬

age services as required at Cape Vincent,
New York and Cornwall, Canada pilot¬
age offices on May 1 and 2, 1962 and May
21, 1962 and by refusing to accept an
assignment as a pilot from the Cape Vin¬
cent pilotage office on June 11, 1962.

(2) These violations warrant the rev¬
ocation of his registration as a U.S.
Registered Pilot as evidenced by certifi¬
cate of registration No. 0026.

(3) The exceptions and proposed find¬
ings and conclusions of the respondent
are not supported by the law and the
facts presented on the record and are
without merit.

Therefore, it is ordered, That:

1. The registration of Captain William
E. Golden as a U.S. Registered Pilot is
revoked;

2. The original copy of this order shall
be served on the respondent by registered
mail within 10 days of the date of this
order.

Dated: October 8, 1963.

A. T. Meschter,
Administrator, Great Lakes
Pilotage Administration.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11545; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;

8:45 a.m.]

[Proceeding No. 1-63]

SHERWOOD G. ANDERSON

Order Denying Renewal of Registra¬
tion as a U.S. Registered Pilot

In the matter of denial of application
of Captain Sherwood G. Anderson, U.S.
Registered Pilot No. 0020, respondent;
Proceeding No. 1-63.

Captain Sherwood G. Anderson, here¬
inafter called the Applicant, applied on
January 8, 1963 for renewal of his regis¬
tration as a U.S. Registered Pilot as
evidenced by certificate of registration
No. 0020 issued on April 21, 1961, to the
Applicant by the Great Lakes Pilotage
Administration under the provisions of
the Great Lakes pilotage regulations, 46
CFR Part 401, et seq.

On February 21, 1963 the Applicant
was advised in writing by the Adminis¬
trator, Great Lakes Pilotage Administra¬
tion that his application for renewal of
registration as a pilot expiring April 30,
1963 was denied on the grounds that the
Applicant, during the 1961 and 1962
navigation seasons, had indicated that he
did not come within the requirements of
46 CFR 401.210(a)(3) with respect to
temperate habits and that he was ex¬
cessively unavailable for pilotage duties
contrary to the requirements of para¬
graph (a) (2) of the same regulation.

The Applicant, in accordance with 46
CFR 401.240(c), timely requested and
was granted a hearing in regard to such
causes for the withholding of the re¬
newal of his registration as a U.S. Regis¬
tered Pilot.

A hearing was held on April 17, 1963
at Port Huron, Michigan, before Walter
E. Lawlor, Hearing Examiner, herein¬
after called the Examiner, assigned pur¬
suant to section 11 of the Administrative
Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 1010). The
Government and the Applicant entered
appearances, through their respective
counsel. Oral and documentary evidence

was submitted by the Government. The
Applicant did not take the stand, nor did
he submit any matters in defense except¬
ing for three letters from the files of the
Great Lakes Pilotage Administration
submitted in the cause of the Govern¬
ment’s case in chief. Upon completion
of the reception of evidence the Govern¬
ment and the Applicant submitted briefs
and proposed findings.

On August 5, 1963 the Examiner sub¬
mitted his recommended decision to the
agency for initial decision. The Govern¬
ment and the Applicant were afforded
opportunity to file exceptions. Neither
the Government nor the Applicant filed
exceptions.

Conclusions and findings. Review of
the record, including the exhibits re¬
ceived in evidence by the Examiner,
clearly establishes that the recom¬
mended decision of the Examiner is fair,
just, and that its adoption is necessary
in the public interest to achieve efficient
pilotage service on the Great Lakes pur¬
suant to the interest and purpose of the
Great Lakes Pilotage Act of 1960 (46
U.S.C. 216(b)) .

Therefore, with full and proper con¬
sideration of all issues of law and fact
presented on the record, the recom¬
mended decision of the Examiner is
hereby affirmed, and it is found:

1. That the Applicant does not qualify
as a person of temperate habits as re¬
quired by 46 CFR 401.210(a)(3);

2. That Applicant’s past history of in¬
temperance is such that any further
certification on his part that he would
be available whenever needed to render
pilotage services as required by 46 CFR
401.210 (a)'(7) could not be relied upon;

3. That the findings 1 and 2, supra, are
good cause for withholding renewal oi
registration as a U.S. Registered Pilot.

Therefore, it is ordered. That:

1. Renewal of the Applicant’s registra¬
tion as a U.S. Registered Pilot is demea.

2. The original copy of this order snau i
be served on the Applicant by register
mail within 10 days of the date of t j
order.

Dated: October 8, 1963.

A. T. Meschter,
Administrator, Great Lakes

Pilotage Administration ..

[F.R. Doc. 63-11544; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963,
8:45 a.m.]

ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50—133J

PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO

Notice of Proposed Issuance of F° c,l,ty
License Amendment I

Please take notice that the A ^
Energy Commission proposes v
Pacific Gas and Electric Conl f amend'
applicant’’) a facility kcense ^1
ment to Provisional Operating ^ m set I
No. DPR-7 substantially m w* 1

forth below. The license aUt reaC ttf I
applicant to operate its nuc w orD ji. I
located in Humboldt County, 1

The license amendment wou to I

conduct of a **£?% A

Friday , November 1, 1963

FEDERAL REGISTER

11709

Humboldt Bay Unit No. 3 reactor at
power levels up to 230 megawatts

(thermal).

The Commission has found that:

(1) The application for amendment
complies with the requirements of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended,
and the Commission’s regulations set
forth in Title 10, Chapter I, CFR;

(2) Operation of the reactor in ac¬
cordance with the license, as amended,
will not present undue hazard to the
health and safety of the public and will
not be inimical to the common defense
and security.

Within thirty (30) days from the date
of publication of this notice in the Fed¬
eral Register, the applicant may file a
request for a hearing, and any person
whose interest may be affected by the
proposed issuance of this license amend¬
ment may file a petition for leave to in¬
tervene. A request for a hearing and
[petitions to intervene shall be filed in ac¬
cordance with the provisions of the Com¬
mon's regulations (10 CFR Part 2).
[If a request for a hearing or a petition for
[leave to intervene is filed within the time
prescribed in this notice, a notice of hear¬
ing or an appropriate order will be issued.
If no request for a hearing or a petition
[for leave to intervene is filed within the
time prescribed in this notice, the Com¬
mission will issue the license amendment
<hirty (30) days from the date of pub¬
lication of this notice in the Federal
agister.

For further details with respect to this
Imposed amendment, see (1) the appli-
-ation for license amendment dated July
1963; (2) the report of the Advisory
'Onmuttee on Reactor Safeguards dated
feptember 12, 1963; and (3) a related
^ards analysis prepared by the Re-
ftf Power Re actor Safety Branch
Ln SL vision of Licensing and Regula¬
tion ui a PPiication amendment is
Rr able for public inspection at the
i:Sm 0n,s Public Document Room,
|v n . H ^ eet Washington 25, D.C.
bbtnin^ ltems (2) and above maybe
icim? Commission's Public

ireceT* Room » or upon request ad-
linn vxr t( ? the Atomic Energy Commis-
K^ gton25 ’ DC -> Attention: Di-
ion ’ Dlvision of Licensing and Regula-

loftfe 1963 eSda ’ Md " thiS 28th day

I ° r t!le atomic Energy Commission.

R. Lowenstein,
Director , Division of
- ^censing and Regulation.

1 1 " 0POSa Amen dment to Facility License

Provislona l Operating LI-
I ectric Comn^. 1 ^ to Pacific Gas and
i^boicit f ° r its react °r located in

IN* by/H’,.. California * is hereby
as fon 0 ws aClCliti0n 0t a second Para-

P t °gram Ur des 3 crihLi CO ? dUCting a s P eclal

fessSS-?* .

2. This amendment is effective as of the
date of issuance.

Date of issuance:

For the Atomic Energy Commission.

Director, Division of
Licensing and Regulation.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11570; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;
8:47 a.m.]

CIVIL AERONAUTICS BOARD

[Docket No. 14837; Order E-20134]

PAN AMERICAN WORLD AIRWAYS,
INC., ET AL.

Order of Investigation and
Suspension

Adopted by the Civil Aeronautics Board
at its office in Washington, D.C., on the
29th day of October 1963.

Round-trip excursion fares proposed
by Pan American World Airways, Inc.,
Pacific Northern Airlines, Inc., and
Alaska Airlines, Inc.; Docket No. 14837.

Pan American World Airways, Inc.
(Pan American), filed 1 tariff revisions
proposing round-trip week-end excursion
fares between Seattle, Washington, on
the one hand, and Fairbanks, Juneau,
and Ketchikan, Alaska, on the other
hand, marked to become effective on
November 1, 1963. Pacific Northern Air¬
lines, Inc. (Pacific Northern), filed 2 for
November 8, 1963, effectiveness, similar
tariff revisions proposing excursion fares
between Seattle/Tacoma, Washington,
on the one hand, and Juneau and Ket¬
chikan, Alaska, on the other hand, and
Alaska Airlines, Inc. (Alaska), also filed
a competitive round-trip 3 excursion fare
between Fairbanks and Seattle/Tacoma
effective on November 9, 1963. All these
fares are marked to expire with March
31,1964.

The proposed round-trip excursion
fares are Seattle-Fairbanks, $99.99;
Seattle-Juneau, $60.60; and Seattle-
Ketchikan, $47.47. These fares are valid
for three days, departing on Friday and
returning on Monday. Passengers may
travel on Pan American’s and Alaska
Airlines’ jet tourist-class service, and on
Pacific Northern’s jet or propeller
tourist-class service.

Pacific Northern filed a complaint re¬
questing suspension and investigation
of the proposed excursion fares, alleging
that these fares would be the lowest com¬
mercial fares in comparable equipment
anywhere in the United States; that such
fares would create diversion from reg¬
ular service and would not generate suf¬
ficient new traffic to offset the revenues
which would be lost; and that further
debasement of the fare structure in the
States-Alaska market would add to the
existing competitive situation without
benefiting the carriers in the market.

In support of its proposal and in
answer to PNA’s complaint, Pan Ameri¬

1 Agent Lounsbury’s C.A.B. No. 272.

2 Pacific Northern’s C.A.B. No. 81.

3 Alaska Airlines’ C.A.B. No. 104.

can states that the Board should permit
it to conduct this fare experiment; that
it will terminate the experiment if it is
not successful; and that there is a strong
residential and nonresidential traffic po¬
tential which could be developed by its
proposed fares.

Upon consideration of the complaint
and all relevant matters, the Board finds
that the subject proposals may result in
unjustifiably low fares and yields, and
that it is unlikely that sufficient new
traffic would be generated to offset the
dilution in revenues which would result.
Consequently, it is found that the pro¬
posed excursion fares should be investi¬
gated. In view of the unusually low
yields involved and resulting harmful
effects upon the revenues of all the car¬
riers in the market, suspension of the
effectiveness of the applicable tariff pro¬
visions appears to be warranted.

Accordingly, pursuant to the Federal
Aviation Act of 1958, and particularly
sections 204(a), 403, 404, and 1002
thereof:

It is ordered. That:

1. An investigation be instituted to
determine whether the fares and pro¬
visions in Alaska Airlines, Inc. C.A.B. No.
104, the fares and provisions in Pacific
Northern Airlines, Inc. C.A.B. No. 81 and
1st Revised Page 5 thereto, and Rule 8
on 4th Revised Page 4-A and fares and
provisions in section 2-C on 3d Revised
Page 8-B of Agent R. C. Lounsbury’s
„C.A.B. No. 272 are, or will be, unjust or
unreasonable, unjustly discriminatory,
unduly preferential, unduly prejudicial,
or otherwise unlawful and if found to be
unlawful to determine and prescribe the
lawful fares and provisions;

2. Pending hearing and decision by

the Board, Alaska Airlines, Inc. C.A.B.
No. 104, Pacific Northern Airlines, Inc.
C.A.B. No. 81 and 1st Revised Page 5
thereto, and Rule 8 on 4th Revised Page
4-A and fares and provisions in section
2-C on 3d Revised Page 8-B of Agent
R. C. Lounsbury’s C.A.B. No. 272, are
suspended and their use deferred to and
including January 29, 1964, unless

otherwise ordered by the Board and that
no changes be made therein during the
period of suspension except by order or
special permission of the Board;

3. The complaint of Pacific Northern
Airlines, Inc., in Docket 14805, to the
extent granted, is consolidated herein;

4. This investigation be assigned for
hearing before an examiner of the Board
at a time and place hereafter to be desig¬
nated ; and

5. A copy of this order be filed with
the aforesaid tariffs and be served upon
Pan American World Airways, Inc.,
Pacific Northern Airlines, Inc., and
Alaska Airlines, Inc., which are made
parties to the investigation ordered
herein.

This order will be published in the
Federal Register.

By the Civil Aeronautics Board.

[seal] Harold R. Sanderson,
Secretary.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11575; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;

8:47 a.m.]

-7

11710

NOTICES

[Docket No. 14657]

TRADE WINDS AIRWAYS CORP.

Notice of Hearing Regarding
Enforcement Proceeding

Notice is hereby given, pursuant to
the provisions of the Federal Aviation
Act of 1958, as amended, that a hearing
in the above-entitled proceeding will be
held on December 3, 1963, at 10:00 a.m.,
e.s.t., in Room 911, Universal Building,
Connecticut and Florida Avenues NW.,
Washington, D.Ca before the undersigned
examiner.

Dated at Washington, D.C., October
25,1963.

[seal! Milton H. Shapiro,

Hearing Examiner.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11576; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;

8:47 a.m.]

[Docket No. 14605J

WEST COAST AIRLINES, INC.
Notice of Hearing; Enforcement Case

Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the
provisions of the Federal Aviation Act
of 1958, as amended, that a hearing in
the above-entitled matter is assigned to
be held on December 3, 1963, at 10 a.m.,
e.s.t., in Room 725, Universal Building,
Connecticut and Florida Avenues NW.,
Washington, D.C., before Examiner Ed¬
ward T. Stodola.

Dated at Washington, D.C., October
29,1963.

[seal] Francis W. Brown,

Chief Examiner.

[FR. Doc. 63-11577; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;

8:47 a.m.]

CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

POSITIONS FOR WHICH THERE IS DETERMINED TO BE A MANPOWER

SHORTAGE

Notice of Listing

Under the provisions of Public Law 86-587, the Civil Service Commission has
determined that there is a manpower shortage for the following:

Series code and grade

Position.

Location

Effective

date

GS-404-11 .

Biological Laboratory Technician (Mi¬

Ames Research Center, Moffett

Aug. 9, 1963.

crobiology (which involves operation
of an electron microscope and vacuum

Field, Calif.

GS-1530-11

evaporator system.

Statistician (General)_

Atlanta Regional Service Center,

Aug. 30,1963.

Center, Internal Revenue Serv¬
ice, Chamblee, Ga.

Travel and transportation expenses
may be paid for appointees to their duty
station for the positions as listed above.

Any such payments as a result of this
determination must be made in accord¬
ance with travel regulations issued by
the Bureau of the Budget.

United States Civil Serv¬
ice Commission,

[seal] David F. Williams,

Director, Bureau of
Management Services.

[FR. Doc. 63-11569; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;

8:47 a.m.]

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 14748 etc.; FCC 63-984]

CHARLES COUNTY BROADCASTING
CO., INC., ET AL.

Order

In re applications of Charles County
Broadcasting Co., Inc., La Plata, Mary¬
land, Docket No. 14748, File No. BP-
14748; Dorlen Broadcasters, Inc., Wal¬
dorf, Maryland, Docket No. 14749, File
No. BP-15287; for construction permits.
Dorlen Broadcasters, Inc., Waldorf,
Maryland, Docket No. 15202, File No.

BRH-1209; for renewal of license of Sta¬
tion WSMD(FM).

At a session of the Federal Communi¬
cations Commission held at its offices
in Washington, D.C. on the 24th day of
October 1963;

By memorandum opinion and order
adopted by the Commission on Septem¬
ber 11, 1963, the Commission “auto¬
matically” designated the application
(BRH-1209) of Dorlen Broadcasters,
Inc., for renewal of license of Station
WSMD(FM), Waldorf, Maryland, for
hearing “as of the date that it is filed”
and as of that date automatically con¬
solidated the renewal application with
the above-captioned applications.

It appearing, that, the application
(BRH-1209) of Dorlen Broadcasters,
Inc., was filed on September 24, 1963;
and

It further appearing, that, said appli¬
cation must be added to the proceeding
involving Charles County Broadcasting
Co., Inc. (Docket No. 14748, File No. BP-
14748) and Dorlen Broadcasters, Inc.
(Docket No. 14749, File No. BP-15287)
as required by the Commission’s mem¬
orandum opinion and order of Septem¬
ber 11, 1963;

Accordingly , it is ordered, That, the
Commission’s memorandum opinion and
order of September 11, 1963 is amended
to add the application of Dorlen Broad¬

casters, Inc., for renewal of license of
Station WSMD(FM) to the caption.

Released: October 25,1963.

Federal Communications
Commission,

[seal] Ben F. Waple,

Secretary.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11586; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;
8:48 a.m.]

[Docket Nos. 15163, 15164; FCC 63M-1183]

CLEVELAND BROADCASTING, INC.
AND COMMUNITY TELECASTERS
OF CLEVELAND, INC.

Order Continuing Hearing

In re applications of Cleveland Broad¬
casting, Inc., Cleveland, Ohio, Docket No.
15163, File No. BPCT-3117; Community
Telecasters of Cleveland, Inc., Cleveland,
Ohio, Docket No. 15164, File No. BPCT-
3176; for construction permits for new
television broadcast stations.

Upon joint oral motion of all parties,
concurred in by the Broadcast Bureau,
made at a prehearing conference held
this date in the above-entitled matter.

It is ordered, This 25th day of October
1963, that the hearing now scheduled to
commence November 12, 1963 is hereby
rescheduled to commence at 10:00 a.m.,
February 17, 1964, in the Commission’s
offices in Washington, D.C.

Released: October 29, 1963.

Federal Communications
Commission,

Ben F. Waple,

Secretary.

[FR. Doc. 63-11587; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;
8:48 a.m.]

[Docket No. 15115; FCC 63M-1181]

NORTHLAND RADIO CORP. (KWEBI
Order Continuing Hearing
In re application of Northland B<*dio
Corporation (KWEB), Rochester,
nesota, File No. BP-14979; for construe

tion permit. ^

The Examiner having under co
era tion an informal written reques
the applicant, dated ° ct ? b f£ 2 u ear ing
seeking a continuance of the
herein; and . aVPCO ii-

It appearing, that all parties i have ^
sented to such request and have
to waive the four-day rule; ana g
It further appearing, that goo
has been shown for a grant oi i
requested; , * nr tober

It is ordered. This 25th day of
1963, that the hearing P reS ? n „L t)0 ned
uled for November 5, 1963, is P an d
to November 25, 1963, at the
place heretofore scheduled.

Released: October 29, 1963.

Federal Communicate
Commission,

[seal] Ben P. ^

[F.R. Doc. 63-11590; Filed. Oct. SU

a-d.Q a.m.

FEDERAL REGISTER

11711

Friday, November 1, 1963

[Docket Nos. 14693, 14694; FCC 63M-1178]

JOHN A. EGLE AND KLFT RADIO, INC.

Order Scheduling Hearing

In re applications of John A. Egle,
Golden Meadow, Louisiana, Docket No.
14693, File No. BP-15478; KLFT Radio,
Inc., Golden Meadow, Louisiana, Docket
No. 14694, File No. BP-15536; for con¬
struction permits.

Pursuant to agreement of counsel ar¬
rived at during the further hearing con¬
ference held on this date, It is ordered,
This 24th day of October 1963, that the
further hearing in the above-styled pro¬
ceeding will commence on December 16,
1963, at 10:00 a.m., in the offices of the
Commission in Washington, D.C.

Released: October 29,1963.

Federal Communications
Commission,

[seal] Ben F. Waple,

Secretary.

[FR. Doc. 63-11588; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;
8:48 a.m.]

[Docket Nos. 15178, 15179; FCC 63M-1184]

HUNDRED LAKES BROADCASTING
CORP. (WSIR) AND WJBS, INC.

Order Continuing Hearing

In re applications of Hundred Lakes
Broadcasting Corporation (WSIR), Win¬
ter Haven, Florida, Docket No. 15178,
Pile No. BP-13015; WJBS, Inc., DeLand,
Florida, Docket No. 15179, File No. BP-
!3075; for construction permits.

Pursuant to the agreements reached
at the prehearing conference held on
October 25, 1963, the evidentiary hear-
m ? the above -entitled proceeding now
scheduled to be held on November 18,
»o3 is continued to a date to be an-
ounced at the conclusion of a further
nearmg conference to be held on Jan¬
uary 13,1964.

ft is so ordered, This the 25th day of
October 1963.

Released: October 29,1963.

Federal Communications
r Commission,

I seal] Ben F. Waple,

Secretary.

F R. Doc. 63-11589; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;
8:48 a.m.]

[Docket No. 15132; FCC 63M-1177]

S & s BROADCASTING CO. (WTAQ)

j 0rder Continuing Hearing

.^Co.^WTAo? 11 T of ® & s Broadcast-
rife No rmd ,i’. La Grange, Illinois,
I Permit. V i 10158; for construction

a re QUtei- ai fA S Examirler ha -s before him
schedule fiv.J, extens >° n of procedural
Compand t Cream Cit y Broadcast-
aim 1 any> I* 10 -, on October 21, 1963;

I i° the'p^Jgg 1 that the other parties
pant of the reJi?m no objection to
“aniediate con^H st ! d extensi ons and to
! 6 consi deration of the pleading;

It is ordered, this 24th day of October
1963, that the request for extension of
procedural schedule is granted; and the
procedural schedule is changed as fol¬
lows:

Final exchange of engineering rebuttal
continued from October 22, 1963, to Oc¬
tober 28,1963;

Notification of witnesses continued from
October 25,1963, to November 1, 1963;

Hearing date continued from October 29,
1963, to November 6, 1963.

Released: October 29,1963.

Federal Communications
Commission,

[seal] Ben F. Waple,

Secretary.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11591; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;

8:49 a.m.]

[Docket Nos. 15204^-15207; FCC 63-988]

WHDH, INC. (WHDH-TV) ET AL.

Memorandum Opinion and Order

Designating Applications for Con¬
solidated Hearing on Stated Issues

In re applications of WHDH, Inc.
(WHDH-TV), Boston, Massachusetts,
Docket No. 15204, File No. BRCT-530;
for renewal of license. Charles River
Civic Television, Inc., Boston, Massa¬
chusetts, Docket No. 15205, File No.
BPCT-3164; Boston Broadcasters, Inc.,
Boston, Massachusetts, Docket No.
15206, File No. BPCT-3170; Greater
Boston TV Co., Inc., Boston, Massachu¬
setts, Docket No. 15207, File No. BPCT-
3171; for construction permits for new
VHF television broadcast stations.

1. The Commission has before it for
consideration: (a) The above-captioned
applications; (b) a “Petition to Dismiss
Application and to Designate for Hear¬
ing Remaining Applications” filed July 5,
1963, by Boston Broadcasters, Inc., re¬
questing dismissal of the application
(BPCT-3171) filed by Greater Boston
TV Co., Inc. (Greater Boston II) and
designation for consolidated hearing of
the applications (BRCT-530, BPCT-
3164, BPCT-3170) filed by WHDH, Inc.
(WHDH), Charles River Civic Television,
Inc. (Charles River) and Boston Broad¬
casters, Inc., respectively; (c) “Com¬
ments in Support of Petition to Dismiss,
Filed by Boston Broadcasters, Inc.” filed
July 18, 1963, by Charles River; (d) a
“Reply of Greater Boston TV Co., Inc. to
Petition to Dismiss its Application and
to Designate Case for Hearing” filed
July 18, 1963 by Greater Boston II, di¬
rected against (b) above; (e) an ^Op¬
position to Petition to Dismiss Applica¬
tion and to Designate for Hearing Re¬
maining Applications” filed July 18, 1963
by WHDH, directed against (b) above;

(f) a “Reply of Boston Broadcasters,
Inc., to Oppositions to Petition to Dis¬
miss Application and to Designate for
Hearing Remaining Applications” filed
on July 30, 1963 by Boston Broadcasters,
Inc., directed against (d) and (e) above;

(g) a “Reply of Charles River Civic Tele¬
vision, Inc. to Opposition of WHDH,
Inc.” filed July 24, 1963 by Charles River
directed against (e) above; and (h) a
“Motion to Strike Reply of Charles River

Civic Television, Inc. to Opposition of
WHDH, Inc.” filed July 29, 1963 by
WHDH directed against (g) above.

2. On September 25, 1962, the Com¬
mission adopted a decision denying the
applications filed by Greater Boston
Television Corporation (Greater Boston
I) and Massachusetts Bay Telecasters,
Inc. and reinstating its grant of the
WHDH application for a construction
permit for a new VHF television broad¬
casting station on Channel 5, Boston,
Massachusetts, made April 25, 1957, and
vacated by a court order of January 19,
1961 (in accordance with the Report and
Recommendation submitted by the Com¬
mission on November 7, 1960). The
Commission simultaneously granted the
pending license application filed by
WHDH to cover the aforementioned con¬
struction permit, but stated that since
evidence of ex parte contacts by parties
to the WHDH application had been pre¬
sented to it, the WHDH license would
be limited to a term of four months, at
which time WHDH would be required to
renew its license. Greater Boston I filed
a Petition for Reconsideration on Oc¬
tober 26, 1962, directed at the Commis¬
sion decision of September 25, 1962,
which was denied by the Commission on
March 13, 1963. On December 17, 1962,
the Commission adopted an Order di¬
recting that new applications for Chan¬
nel 5, Boston, Massachusetts, would be
accepted from January 26,1963, to March
26, 1963 (25 Pike & Fischer R.R. 80). On
March 6, 1963, the Commission denied
a petition by WHDH to reconsider and
set aside this order. Greater Boston I
and WHDH have taken separate appeals
to the Court of Appeals (Case Nos. 17,785
and 17,788, respectively) from the Com¬
mission’s September 25, 1962 decision
and subsequent Orders. On October 25,
1962, WHDH filed its renewal applica¬
tion (BRCT-530); on March 25, 1963,
and March 26, 1963, Charles River and
Boston Broadcasters, Inc. filed their ap¬
plications (BPCT-3164 and BPCT-3170,
respectively); on March 26, 1963 Greater
Boston II, a corporation, 65 percent of the
stockholders or subscribers of which hold
73.68 percent of the stock in Greater
Boston I filed its application (BPCT-
3171). Boston Broadcasters, Inc., and
Charles River have filed pleadings re¬
questing both the dismissal of the
Greater Boston II application and the
designation for consolidated hearing of
the remaining applications. Greater
Boston II opposes the first request;
WHDH opposes the second request.

3. The Commission is presented here
with two questions: First, whether the
application filed by Greater Boston II
must be dismissed as in violation of
§ 1.309(a) of the Commission’s rules; and
second, whether action in this proceed¬
ing must be withheld pursuant to § 1.309
(b) of the rules pending resolution of
the appeals taken by WHDH and Greater
Boston I. As respects the first ques¬
tion, Boston Broadcasters, Inc., Charles
River and WHDH (in its opposition to
the petitions to deny filed by Boston
Broadcasters, Inc. and Charles River)
all claim that the Greater Boston II ap-

11712

NOTICES

plication must be dismissed as in viola¬
tion of § 1.309(a) 1 of the Commission's
rules, in light of the fact that the corpo¬
rate composition of Greater Boston II
is almost 75 percent the same as that
of Greater Boston I; that the application
filed by Greater Boston I was denied on
September 26, 1962, less than one year
prior to the filing, by Greater Boston II,
of the application involved in this pro¬
ceeding; and that complete identity be¬
tween applicants is not required to bring
the instant case within the purview of
that rule, citing Jefferson Amusement
Co., 10 R.R. 463, 470e. They further
state that Greater Boston II has offered
no grounds to justify its request for
waiver of that rule, and that a hearing to
determine whether the rule should be
waived would result in undue delay, nul¬
lifying the Commission’s purpose in
granting only a four-month license to
WHDH.

4. In its opposition, Greater Boston II
contends that its application should not
be dismissed on these grounds since
§ 1.309(a) of the rules was not intended
to govern cases such as this, in which
the Commission specifically limited the
duration of a license to four months and
invited competing applicants to apply
for the channel at the end of that period.

5. The Commission recognizes the fact
that the composition of Greater Boston

I and Greater Boston II is substantially
the same and that the provisions of
§ 1.309(a), for this reason, require the
dismissal of the Greater Boston n ap¬
plication. However, our decision grant¬
ing WHDH, Inc., a four-month license
explicitly recognized the fact that the
ordinary procedures were inapplicable
in light of the fact that WHDH had
been in operation for a period of five
years, a term greater than the ordinary
license period of three years. Clearly,
then, to require the dismissal of the
application of Greater Boston II in the
unusual circumstances of this case
would be inequitable, since this extended
term served to deprive Greater Boston

II of the opportunity to file a compet¬
ing application against an ordinary
renewal.

6. As respects the second question,
both Greater Boston n and WHDH argue
in their opposition to the Petitions to
Deny that, since Greater Boston I and
WHDH have appealed the Commission
decision to the Court of Appeals (see
Paragraph 2), any Commission action
involving the applications filed to date
in this proceeding made prior to the
relevant court decisions, is premature
and prohibited by § 1.309(b) 2 3 of the Com¬
mission’s rules.

1 Section 1.309(a) provides in part:

“Where the Commission has denied an
application for a new station * * * no like
application involving service of the same
kind to substantially the same area by
substantially the same applicant, or his suc¬
cessor * * * may be filed within 12 months
from the effective date of the Commission’s
action * * *”

3 Section 1.309(b) provides in part:

“Where an appeal has been taken from
the action of the Commission in denying
a particular application, another applica¬
tion for the same class of broadcast station
and for the same area, in whole or in part,

7. The Commission recognizes that
§ 1.309(b) of the Commission’s rules is,
on its face, applicable to this case, but
feels that the peculiar facts presented
herein warrant its waiver. Specifically,
the Commission feels that to withhold
action in this proceeding pending final
action in the Court would frustrate the
Commission’s purpose in limiting the
duration of the WHDH license.

8. In its September 25, 1962, decision
the Commission limited the duration
of the license granted to WHDH to four
months for the reasons stated therein.
In the matter of WHDH, Inc., 24 R.R.
255, 33 FCC 449. Since the Commission
determined in that proceeding that the
ex parte conduct by Robert B. Choate
should be treated only within the con¬
text of a comparative issue, similar treat¬
ment is accorded the matter in this
proceeding, as encompassed in Issue 1.

9. In its September 25, 1962, decision
the Commission also found that Michael
Henry, a party to the Greater Boston I
application had failed to report court
orders from both the Supreme Court of
Missouri (September 3, 1940) and the
United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Missouri (March 3,
1941) directing that he be dropped from
the Roll of Attorneys. The Commission
treated this within the context of the
standard comparative issue, found that
it warranted a comparative demerit, and
equated this matter with the issue re¬
ferred to above in Paragraph 8, concern¬
ing WHDH. Since Henry is no longer a
party to the Greater Boston II applica¬
tion, this matter is not put in issue in
this proceeding.

10. Boston Broadcasters, Inc., and
Charles River propose to maintain their
main studio in Cambridge, outside the
principal community to be served and
request waiver of § 3.613(a) of the
rules. The parties have made a sufficient
showing pursuant to § 3.613(b) of the
rules that a waiver of § 3.613(a) would
serve the public interest.

11. Greater Boston II has failed to
file proof that it has completely fulfilled
the public notice requirements of § 1.359
(c) of the Commission’s rules. The Com¬
mission has been advised by counsel for
the applicant that publication is cur¬
rently being made and that upon com¬
pletion of publication proof thereof will
be filed with the Commission. Under
these circumstances, the Commission is
of the view that a waiver of § 1.359(c)
of the rules is warranted to the extent
that the rules require commencement of
publication within two weeks after an
application has been tendered for filing.

12. Upon due consideration of the
above-captioned applications, the Com¬
mission finds that pursuant to section
309(e) of the Communications Act of
1934, as amended, a hearing is necessary,
and that WJIDH, Inc., Charles River
Civic Television, Inc., Boston Broad¬
casters, Inc., and Greater Boston TV Co.,
Inc., are legally, financially, technically
and otherwise qualified to construct, own
and operate the proposed television
broadcast stations.

filed by the same applicant, • • * will not
be considered untU final disposition of such
appeal.”

In view of the foregoing, It is ordered,
This 24th day of October 1963, that the
“Petition to Dismiss Application and to
Designate for Hearing Remaining Appli¬
cations” and “Comments in Support of
Petition to Dismiss” filed by Boston
Broadcasters, Inc.”, respectively, are
hereby denied; that the “Opposition to
Petition to Dismiss Application and to
Designate for Hearing Remaining Appli¬
cations” and the “Reply of Greater Bos¬
ton TV Co., Inc. to Petition to Dismiss
Its Application and to Designate Case
for Hearing” filed by WHDH, Inc. and
Greater Boston TV Co., Inc., respectively
(insofar as they are, in effect, petitions
requesting deferred action in this pro¬
ceeding) , are hereby denied; that §§ 1.309
(a) and (b) and 1.359(c) of the Com¬
mission’s rules are waived insofar as they
affect Greater Boston TV Co., Inc.; and
that the four above-captioned applica¬
tions are hereby designated for hearing
in a consolidated proceeding, at a time
and place to be specified in a subsequent
Order, on the following issues:

1. To determine on a comparative
basis which of the operations proposed in
the above-captioned applications would
best serve the public interest, convenience
and necessity in light of the significant
differences among the applicants as to:

(a) The background and experience of
each, bearing on its ability to own and
operate the proposed television broadcast
station.

(b) The proposals of each with respect
to the management and operation of the ]
proposed television broadcast stations.

2. To determine, in the light of the
evidence adduced pursuant to the fore¬
going issue, which of the applications
should be granted.

It is further ordered , That, the issues
in the above-captioned proceeding nwy
be enlarged by the Examiner, on his own
motion or on petition properly filed oy
party to the proceeding, and upon sui* i
ficient allegations of fact in suppo
thereof, by the addition of the
issue: “To determine whether the fui f
available to the applicant will £ iver t |
sonable assurance that the proposals |
forth in the application will be en
tuated.”

It is further ordered, That to f
themselves of the opportunity w 1
heard, WHDH, Inc., Charles Rrj* I
Television, Inc., Boston Broads I

Inc., and Greater Boston TV Co*» ^ I
pursuant to § 1.140(c) of the r u I
person or by attorney, shall, ■

twenty (20) days of the maiimg oi ■
order, file with the Commission, I

cate, a written appearance statuig ^
tention to appear on the date se ^ i
hearing and present evidence
issues specified in this order. jj. i

It is further ordered, That the mi
cants herein shall, pursuant o to fl
311(a) (2) of the Communication ^ ^1
1934, as amended, and § l- 36 e ither |
rules, give notice of the hear ioint iy. J
individually, or, if fe ^ slb ^er P re ' I
within the time and in the advise]
scribed in such rule, and s ,. on of]
the Commission of the P

FEDERAL REGISTER

11713

Friday, November 1, 1963

such notice as required by § 1.362(g) of
| the rules.

Released: October 29,1963.

Federal Communications
Commission,

[seal! Ben F. Waple,

Secretary.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11592; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;
8:49 a.m.]

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Wage and Hour Division

| CERTIFICATES AUTHORIZING EM¬
PLOYMENT OF FULL-TIME STU¬
DENTS WORKING OUTSIDE OF
SCHOOL HOURS IN RETAIL OR
SERVICE ESTABLISHMENTS AT SPE¬
CIAL MINIMUM WAGES

Notice is hereby given that pursuant
I to section 14 of the Fair Labor Standards
(Act of 1938 (52 Stat. 1060, as amended,
129 U.S.C. 201 et seq.), the regulation
I on employment of full-time students (29
jCPRPart 519), and Administrative Or-
I der No. 561 (27 F.R. 4001), the establish¬
ments listed in this notice have been
special certificates authorizing
I the employment of full-time students
■working outside of school hours at hourly
■wage rates lower than the minimum wage
■rates otherwise applicable under section
16 of the act. The effective and expira-
■ ion dates, type of establishment and
■total number of employees of the estab¬
lishment are as indicated below. Pur¬
suant to § 519.6(b) of the regulation, the
inimum certificate rates are not less
■J!? 85 Percent of the minimum appli-
Iqf e ,under section 6 of the Fair Labor
standards Act.

The following certificates were issued
|{S nt , t0 P ara §raphs (c) and (g) of
Ifnrof 29 CFR Part 519 » Providing
lDnrt an a lowance n ot to exceed the pro-
5, the total number of hours
low students at rates be-

lofhm ' 00 an hour t0 the ^al number
lestahuiv. worked by all employees in the
E n P L^ ent u during the base P eri od, or
Rti!I! en ;’ whichever is lesser, in occu-

tohirvT+iT V11C same general classes in
r^cn the r ■ -

^'ons of the

me establishment employed full-

lour in at Wa ^es below $1.00 an
uur m the base period.

Region I

P^ : H e£r S t^ ai ? A Co '' 82 Main Street, Keene,
fore; 19 10-7-63 3-31-64 (variety

|j j xr mployees )-

W 113-119 Main Street,

l Vari etv storp ’ ^ ffeCtive 11 ~ 1 -63 to 3-31-64
I 3 l0re * H employees).

Region IV

t’ ; «' Houm» M " kete ’ Inc., 1009 Barrow
K «4 L a.; effective 10-10-63 to

I U°od store; 45 employees).

ibUan c RECI0N VI11
[? te . 100 Soled’art^a ? 73 Berns Department
1&-29 -r<i S ^ reet > San Antonio, Tex.;

ft® e *Ployees) 9-2-64 <department

J Vers -J. L°LaP^ arket ’ estate of G- L. La-
fe ive 10^U 6, f rS ’. trustee ’ P °teau, Okla.;
'"ies). 9-2-64 (food store; 30

Region X

M. C. Headrick Super Markets, Cleveland,
Tenn.; effective 9-9-63 to 3-31-64 (food store;
49 employees).

Peebles Department Store, Inc., 429 Mathis
Street, Manassas, Va.; effective 10-22-63 to
3-31-64 (department store; 34 employees).

W. S. Peebles & Co., Inc., Main and Hicks
Streets, Lawrenceville, Va.; effective 10-25-63
to 3-31-64 (department and food store; 65
employees).

W. S. Peebles & Co., Inc., New Hicks and
Sharp Streets, Lawrenceville, Va.; effective
10-25-63 to 3-31-64 (food store; 18 em¬
ployees) .

W. S. Peebles & Co., Inc., 138 Danville
Street, South Hill, Va.; effective 10-12-63 to
3-31-64 (department store; 17 employees).

The following certificates were issued
to establishments coming into existence
after May 1, 1960, under paragraphs (c),
(d), (g), and (h) of § 519.6 of 29 CFR,
Part 519. The certificates permit the em¬
ployment of full-time students at rates
of not less than 85 cents an hour in the
classes of occupations listed, and provide
for limitations on the percentage of
full-time student hours of employment
at rates below $1.00 an hour to total
hours of employment of all employees.
The percentage limitations vary from
month to month between the minimum
and maximum figures indicated.

The J. S. Dillon & Sons Stores Co., Inc.,
No. 44, 614 West Sixth, Junction City, Kans.;
effective 10-8-63 to 9-2-64; cashiers, clerks,
carry-out, wrappers, maintenance; 10 per¬
cent for each month (food store; 32 em¬
ployees) .

Falls Super Market, Inc., 405 South Mill
Street, Redwood Palls, Minn.; effective 10-8-
63 to 9-2-64; carry-out boys, stock boys; be¬
tween 7.3 percent and 10 percent (food store;
25 employees).

S. S. Kresge Co., No. 561, Winchester Shop¬
ping Center, 2260 Valley Avenue, Winchester,
Va.; effective 10-8-63 to 9-2-64; sales clerk;
between 4.2 percent and 10 percent (variety
store; 36 employees).

S. S. Kresge Co., No. 741, Caprock Shop¬
ping Center, 50th Street at Canton Avenue,
Lubbock, Tex.; effective 10-8-63 to 9-2-64;
sales clerk; between 0.8 percent and 9.8 per¬
cent (variety store; 22 employees).

S. S. Kresge Co., No. 757, Capital Plaza
Shopping Center, 5431 Interregional Hwy.,
Austin, Tex.; effective 10-8-63 to 9-2-64;
sales clerk; between 0.7 percent and 10 per¬
cent (variety store; 20 employees).

S. S. Kresge Co., No. 771, West Park Plaza,
1545 Grand Avenue, Billings, Mont.; effective
10-5-63 to 9-2-64; sales clerk; 10 percent for
each month (variety store; 30 employees).

F. W. Woolworth Co., No. 2576, No. 30
Cache Road Square, 38th and Cache Road,
Lawton, Okla.; effective 10-8-63 to 9-2-64;
stock clerks, sales clerks; between 5.6 per¬
cent and 10 percent (variety store; 25
employees).

Each certificate has been issued upon
the representations of the employer
which, among other things, were that
employment of full-time students at
special minimum rates is necessary to
prevent curtailment of opportunities for
employment, and the hiring of full-time
students at special minimum rates will
not tend to displace full-time employees.
The certificates may be annulled or with¬
drawn, as indicated therein, in the
manner provided in Part 528 of Title 29
of the Code of Federal Regulations. Any
person aggrieved by the issuance of any
of these certificates may seek a review or

reconsideration thereof within 15 days
after publication of this notice in the
Federal Register pursuant to the pro¬
visions of 29 CFR 519.9.

Signed at Washington, D.C., this 23d
day of October, 1963.

Robert G. Gronewald,
Authorized Representative of
the Administrator.

[F.R. Doc. 63-11557; Filed, Oct. 31, 1963;

8:46 a.m.]

INTERSTATE COMMERCE
COMMISSION

FOURTH SECTION APPLICATIONS
FOR RELIEF

October 29,1963.

Protests to the granting of an appli¬
cation must be prepared in accordance
with Rule 1.40 of the general rules of
practice (49 CFR 1.40) and filed within
15 days from the date of publication of
this notice in the Federal Register.

Long-and-Short Haul

FSA No. 38617: Fresh meats and pack¬
inghouse products to southern territory.
Filed by O. W. South, Jr., agent* (No.
A4390), for interested rail carriers.
Rates on fresh meats and packinghouse
products, in carloads, from Evansville,
Ind., Louisville and Lexington, Ky., and
Cincinnati, Ohio, to points in southern
territory.

Grounds for relief: Carrier competi¬
tion.

Tariff: Supplement 32 to Southern
Freight Association, agent, tariff I.C.C.
S-158.

FSA No. 38618: Fresh vegetables to
Bells, Tenn. Filed by O. W. South, Jr.,
agent (No. A4391), for interested rail
carriers. Rates on vegetables, fresh or
green (not cold-packed nor frozen), in
carloads, from points in Georgia, North
Carolina, South Carolina and Virginia,
to Bells, Tenn.

Grounds for relief: Rate relationship
and grouping.

Tariff: Supplement 31 to Southern
Freight Association, agent, tariff I.C.C,
S-178.

FSA No. 38619: Pig iron from Buffalo,
N.Y., group points to Toledo, Ohio .
Filed by Traffic Executive Association-
Eastern Railroads, agent (E.R. No. 2688),
for and on behalf of The New York Cen¬
tral Railroad Company. Rates on pig
iron, in carloads, from Buffalo, Harriet,
North Tonawanda, Niagara Falls and
Suspension Bridge, N.Y., to Toledo, Ohio.

Grounds for relief: Water competition.

Tariff: Supplement 38 to New York
Central Railroad Company tariff I.C.C.
2119.

FSA No. 38620: Iron or steel pipe from
Princeton, Ky. Filed by Southwestern
Freight Bureau, agent (No. B-8466), for
interested rail carriers. Rates on iron
or steel pipe and related articles, in car¬
loads, from Princeton, Ky., to points in
Texas.

Grounds for relief: Market competi¬
tion.

11714

NOTICES

Tariff: Supplement 313 to South¬
western Freight Bureau, agent, tariff
I.C.C. 4116.

FSA No. 38621: Iron or steel casing or
tubing from Carnegie , Pa. Filed by
Southwestern Freight Bureau, agent (No.
B-8467), for interested rail carriers.
Rates on wrought iron or steel oil country
tubular goods, viz: casing or tubing, in
carloads to transit point, and motor
vehicle beyond, from Carnegie, Pa., to
points and places in Oklahoma and
Texas.

Grounds for relief: Market competi¬
tion.

Tariff: Supplement 7 to Southwestern
Freight Bureau, agent, tariff I.C.C. 4512.

By the Commission.

[seal] Harold D. McCoy,

Secretary .

[F.R. Doc. 63-11559; Piled, Oct. 31, 1963;

8:46 a.m.J

know your government

...IS. GOVERNMENT
ORGANIZATION MANUAL

•I

Sfi

Co I

Office of the Federal Register

National Archives.
and Records Service
General Services Administration

1963-64 ^

Official guide to the functions of
the Federal Government

PAPER BOUND, WITH CHARTS

Order from

Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.G., 20402

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Federal Register 1963-11-01"

See other formats